HR 45 Gun Control Bill

[guardian]

The following are excepts/points from HR45 that I selected from the text of the bill. (Full text at http://spktruth2power.wordpress.com/2009/02/09/hr-45-gun-control-bill/)


* "IN GENERAL - It shall be unlawful for any person ... to possess a qualifying firearm ..."
* "In order to be issued a firearm license ... an individual shall submit to the Attorney General ...an application, which shall include" passport photo, address/date/place of birth, thumb print, and "any other subjects, as the Attorney General determines to be appropriate"
* "Failure To Report Loss or Theft of Firearm- It shall be unlawful for any person who owns a qualifying firearm to fail to report the loss or theft of the firearm to the Attorney General within 72 hours after the loss or theft is discovered."
* "CRIMINAL PENALTIES -Failure To Possess Firearm License; Failure To Comply With Qualifying Firearm Sale or Transfer Requirements; Failure To Maintain or Permit Inspection of Record...shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both."

This is the next step to confiscation of all firearms. These gun control nuts won't be happy until the only people that have guns are criminal, drug gangs, home invasion thugs, Mexican drug gang kidnappers. Next they'll be coming after your baseball bats and kitchen knives and won't be happy until you are completely defenseless. We all know how well that worked in Washington DC and how strict guns laws (SARCASM) complete eliminated all crime in DC.

These "laws" are bad enough (and I think un-Constitutional) at any time. But do you really want a Bush/Rove administration with this sort of control over you and gun rights?

[Turbineguy]

1. It's always the next step.

And yes, the gun snatchers really do want people to be murdered in their beds by criminal gangs. Why otherwise would they want gun control?

[guardian]

2. It doesn't matter what their intent is

What matters are the results. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Leave your fucking hands off MY guns.

[Turbineguy]

8. My point is this:

"These gun control nuts won't be happy until the only people that have guns are criminal, drug gangs, home invasion thugs, Mexican drug gang kidnappers. Next they'll be coming after your baseball bats and kitchen knives and won't be happy until you are completely defenseless. We all know how well that worked in Washington DC and how strict guns laws (SARCASM) complete eliminated all crime in DC."

If the bill is a bad idea (and I think it probably is) why resort to such ridiculous arguments? Why can't these sorts of things be discussed on their merits or the lack of them?

[X_Digger]

13. An emotional issue..

Even in the face of decreasing crime before, during, and even after the '94 AWB, you get a lot of emotional blather about evil guns and 'oh noes, the lil chillins!!' Even with homicides, accidental injuries, and suicides with firearms down, it keeps being touted as critical for us (or for mexico)..

Even with _more_ "assault weapons" in americans' hands, and decreasing crime, the Brady bunch still spins up the hype machine every time a tragedy is perpetrated by a wacko or a repeat felon.

Nobody remembers that gun owners, shooting groups, and even the NRA backed things like the the NFA and National Instant Check System to deny sales of firearms to felons and those adjudicated mentally incompetent.

Point is, when gun owners compromise, they continue to be vilified as 'armed wackos', 'violent thugs', etc. No wonder our reaction when someone puts out a hand is to flinch.

[Tim01]

19. Exhibit A

"Oh, by all means, gun worshippers -- let your dick extensions kill as many people as possible, as often as possible, as quickly as possible, if it makes you feel like real men!"

Really, I could go on all day listing crazy anti-gun hysterical quotes. I just don't want to do the work. And,yes, many of those quotes would talk about how "all guns should be banned".

[spin]

31. You might find that logic and researched sources...

make for a more interesting argument than "crazy anti-gun hysterical quotes".

I take a pro-gun position and like posting on DU more than pro-gun sites where everyone agrees with me. By posting here, I've learned a lot and refined my position. It's sad when I find the people who might come up with a new interesting and intelligent argument against guns, waste everybody's time with the sad "dick extension" rant.

I guess if you just enjoy slapping graffiti on a wall there might be some appeal to insulting pro-gun people, but just as the kid with a spray can of paint and a blank wall, you don't make your side of the issue look intelligent.

[Tim01]

4. Oh, of course.

Because if guns are more regulated criminals will just turn into law abiding citizens. Why didn't I see that in the first place.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bluestateguy]

5. Who is the moron who is sponsoring this bill?

A Bush/Rove Administration would disallow any Arab person, any Muslim, and most likely any black or Hispanic person to own a gun. If they really had their druthers only conservative white men would be allowed to have guns.

[guardian]

6. My reading of the bill gives

the current Attorney General wide discretion in adding new rules and restrictions. Do you really want a John Ashcroft or Alberto Gonzales deciding who can own guns or adding new restrictions? Heck lets just raise the application fee to $10,000 so only the rich can own a gun. We wouldn't want the little guy to have an equal chance.

[TheWraith]

7. Congressman Bobby Rush, IL-01.

Because a Chicago teenager got shot on a bus by another teenager about 2 years ago. Never mind the fact that the teenager who killed him had the gun illegally.

[bluestateguy]

9. Ah the irony

A former Black Panther advocating gun control. The Panthers always denounced gun control as racist: an attempt by white politicians to disarm black people.

[spin]

11. Bobby Rush can't legally possess a firearm...

In 1969 Rush served 6 months for Felony firearm possession, giving up his right to have and poses firearms. 2009 saw Rush bring to the House H.R. 45 <1>(Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009) (Introduced in House). The bill itself is under criticism for violating Americans rights, and bringing criticism to Rush for introducing a Bill that would track the possession of firearms of individuals when he himself cannot legally posses them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobby_Rush

And the Black Panthers are right about gun control being racist.

Today is not 1893, and when proponents of restrictive gun control insist that their motivations are color-blind, there is a possibility that they are telling the truth. Nonetheless, there are some rather interesting questions that should be asked today. The most obvious question is, "Why should a police chief or sheriff have any discretion in issuing a concealed handgun permit?" Here in California, even the state legislature's research arm--hardly a nest of pro-gunners--has admitted that the vast majority of permits to carry concealed handguns in California are issued to white males. <36> Even if overt racism is not an issue, an official may simply have more empathy with an applicant of a similar cultural background, and consequently be more able to relate to the applicant's concerns. As my wife pointedly reminded a police official when we applied for concealed weapon permits, "If more police chiefs were women, a lot more women would get permits, and be able to defend themselves from rapists."

Gun control advocates today are not so foolish as to openly promote racist laws, and so the question might be asked what relevance the racist past of gun control laws has. One concern is that the motivations for disarming blacks in the past are really not so different from the motivations for disarming law-abiding citizens today. In the last century, the official rhetoric in support of such laws was that "they" were too violent, too untrustworthy, to be allowed weapons. Today, the same elitist rhetoric regards law-abiding Americans in the same way, as child-like creatures in need of guidance from the government. In the last century, while never openly admitted, one of the goals of disarming blacks was to make them more willing to accept various forms of economic oppression, including the sharecropping system, in which free blacks were reduced to an economic state not dramatically superior to the conditions of slavery.
http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/cramer.racism.html

[friendly_iconoclast]

22. I have the feeling Bobby Rush was the Panther version of Whitey Bulger

ie, an informant. Why else would he sponsor a bill that would basically give the White House control
of who could be armed? Rep. Rush is not stupid, he has to realize that sooner or later another
John Mitchell or Alberto Gonazales might be Attorney General

[friendly_iconoclast]

25. It would be a dandy way to help set up American "Freikorps"

First you disarm the 'undesirables'. Then you could get this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freikorps

The designation of Freikorps (German for "Free Corps") was originally applied to voluntary armies formed in German lands from the middle of 18th century onwards. After World War I the term was used for the paramilitary organizations that sprang up around Weimar Germany and fought against Weimar enemies (internal and external)....

...The meaning of the word changed over time. After 1918, the term was used for the paramilitary organizations that sprang up around Germany as soldiers returned in defeat from World War I. They were the key Weimar paramilitary groups active during that time. Many German veterans felt disconnected from civilian life, and joined a Freikorps in search of stability within a military structure. Others, angry at their sudden, apparently inexplicable defeat, joined up in an effort to put down Communist uprisings or exact some form of revenge (see Dolchstoßlegende). They received considerable support from Minister of Defense Gustav Noske, a member of the Social Democratic Party of Germany, who used them to crush the German Revolution and the Marxist Spartacist League, including the murder of Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg on 15 January 1919. They were also used to defeat the Bavarian Soviet Republic in 1919.<1>

On 5 May 1919 twelve workers (most of them members of the Social Democratic Party, SPD) were arrested and killed by members of Freikorps Lützow in Perlach near Munich based on a tip from a local cleric saying they were communists. A memorial on Pfanzeltplatz in Munich today commemorates this atrocity.<2><3><4>...

(Emphasis mine)

[derby378]

10. Fortunately, HR45 appears to be going nowhere

It doesn't have a single cosponsor in the House.

What we should be watching out for, however, is an expanded version of the original 1994 semi-auto ban - it could be introduced on the Senate floor by Sen. Feinstein as early as this week, who has held off until after the funeral services for those Oakland cops who were killed on the 22nd.

[zipplewrath]

12. I'd be surprised

After what happened to democrats in '94, I'd be surprised if any of theses attempts goes anywhere. It's a new "third rail" as far as many of them are concerned.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[safeinOhio]

15. This all works

with those that swear Obama is going to take their guns. I'll bet ya a BJ that the government makes no attempt to take your guns away in the next 4 year, unless you do a crime. Never got a taker.

[guardian]

20. This is how it starts

Case in point: http://www.gunsandcrime.org/aussiegc.html

[safeinOhio]

21. So, you'll accept my wager?

didn't think so.

[guardian]

26. You can pay off your famous BJ wager

to DonP of Reply #24. As it already happened.

"didn't think so"

Go back to burying your head in hypocrite land.

[safeinOhio]

27. You can't read?

It was pretty simple. IN the next four years if the government takes YOUR gun away.
Now get your head out of tin foil land.

[guardian]

29. Nice Tap Dance

Hey stupidinOhio. Nice tap dance. Pay up.

[SteveM]

32. The "war on guns" is to the Left what the "war on drugs" is to the Right...

No matter how damaging economically and politically the respective prohibitions are, the promoters of bans will obsessively continue to push their agenda of "my morals are more moral than your morals." These prohibitions are about hating tens of millions of Americans so as to blame societal ills on some bogey than to address the issues prohibitionists claim they are concerned with. Fortunately, the average progressive has had it with gun control. But the prohibitionist is still firmly lodged within the Democratic Party national organization, its big city political bureaus and within the fading but still effective mainstream media. Actually, the latter is the most powerful anti-gun lobby remaining in a "movement" which has become more PETA grandstanding than popular.

[one-eyed fat man]

33. in a nutshell

[corruptmewithpower]

16. The real purpose of gun control has always been genocide.

Death by Gun Control


http://www.jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/deathgc.htm

[guardian]

17. Fantastic link! Thank you.

[corruptmewithpower]

18. You are quite welcome.

Deaths by Mass Unpleasantness:
Estimated Totals for the Entire 20th Century

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat8.htm#Smoking

[Xela]

23. Another perspective: Stages of genocide

I'v seen that info before.

But I believe these are the generally accepted stages:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide#Stages_of_genocide_and_efforts_to_prevent_it

Xela

[corruptmewithpower]

28. Your link is intesting, but is bereft of practical information about the

prevention of genocide. It also failed to take into account the ease of murdering disarmed populations.

[Xela]

30. Agreed, hence my sharing of it, both links together bring about a better picture...

...Than say just one or the other.

Xela

[aikoaiko]

24. HR 45 - do not want