By John Sergeant
SENATE BILL SB-2099 – HR45
Concerning the Blair-Holt proposed legislation: Senate Bill SB-2099 will require us to put on our 2009 1040 federal tax form all guns that you have or own. It may require fingerprints and a tax of $50 per gun. The bill was authored by Congressman Bobby Rush-D, from Chicago. Ironically, he was arrested in 1969 for possession of illegal weapons as a Black Panther leader.
In November, our lying president promised he was not going after our Second Amendment rights. This bill was introduced on Feb.24 by Bobby Rush-D, his old buddy from Chicago.
This bill will become public knowledge after it is voted into law. But, it must pass the Senate first and chances are the democrats won’t risk it and they will let it die in committee where it should die! The full text of the proposed amendment is on the U.S. Senate homepage,
http://www.senate.gov// http://www.senate.gov/ You can find the bill by doing a search by the bill number, SB-2099.
You know who to call; I strongly suggest you do. Please send a copy of this e-mail to every gun owner you know.
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h45/text
Congress is now starting on the firearms confiscation bill. If it passes, gun owners will become criminals if you don’t fully comply.
It has started. Very 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 # – Each update change of ownership through private or public sale must be reported and there could be a possible cost of $25 – Failure to do so you automatically lose the right to own a firearm and are subject up to a year in jail. – There is a child provision clause on page 16 section 305 stating a child-access provision. Gun must be locked and inaccessible to any child under 18. -They would have the right to come and inspect that you are storing your gun safely away from accessibility to children and fine is punishable for up to 5 yrs. in prison.
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://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.45:
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h45/show
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 not. YOUR rights are next. Government is taking away our right to choose, as well as the right to defend ourselves from intruders.
IT DOES NOT MATTER IF THIS BILL DIES IN COMMITTEE OR IT REACHES THE FLOOR FOR A VOTE, YOU AT LEAST NEED TO KNOW THE LEGISLATOR THAT PROPOSED IT.
The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.
And now this, its the same subject, but writen by a group of people as a project:
Dear Representatives,
WE THE PEOPLE DO NOT SUPPORT H.R.45, the Firearm Licensing bill (2009).
WE are tired of our rights being denigrated and destroyed.
Our vote for any such bill is NO! Further, any politician who votes for this bill or any bill of this type will be noted, and voted against when they come up for re-election.
There are currently over 20,000 existing gun laws on the books and most of them do nothing to stop or curtail criminals. Reducing restictions to lawful gun ownership, however, have proven to do just that. Statistics are clear. Where ever lawful gun ownership flourishes, crime rates, by whatever measure, are reduced. In states with lawful handgun carry laws, crime rates are lower. The rate of crimes committed by lawful owners of firearms is a very small percentage of the overall rate of crimes committed with firearms and those numbers are undeniable. The federally required NICS is an excellent tool in determining the eligibility of an individual to legally purchase a handgun or rifle. In the city of Kennesaw, Ga., just outside of Atlanta, it is required by law that every home have a gun. After that law was passed in 1982, the crime rate immediately dropped by 89% and has remained among the lowest in the state ever since. Instance after instance shows that high legal gun ownership relates to lower crime, and places that make it hard to own guns or ban them altogether relates to a higher crime rate. Look at many of the larger, supposedly progressive cities and states in the northeastern U.S. Many have some of the highest rates of gun crime there are simply because the criminals know there is little chance of being confronted by a law abiding gun owner.
Stop criminalizing the lawful and law abiding gun owners. The studies by Department of Justice themselves show that these such weapons are used in a statistically insignificant portion of crime. And when they are used, their use would not have been prevented by the legislation.
History and statistics both prove that such bills are destructive to the citizenry. If this bills’ purpose is to truly “protect the public against the unreasonable risk of injury and death” then the Congress should realize that the only threats to the public are from a criminal element that this bill (unlike others that already exist and are not enforced) will not address, and from the government itself. We would like to think it would not happen here, but as the government is getting larger, and the people weaker, we should always consider history.
* In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated. This doesn’t include the 30 million “Uncle Joe” starved to death in the Ukraine.
* In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
* Germany established gun control in 1928. In 1938, the Nazis extended that control to ban the possession of military style weapons and to outlaw the sale of any weapons without government approval. (This sounds a lot like some of the current gun control efforts being pushed for in our country today.) From 1939 to 1945, the Gestapo & SS killed millions of people unable to defend themselves.
* China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up & exterminated.
* Guatamala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up & exterminated.
* Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up & exterminated. The total dead are said to be 2-3 million.
* Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, 1-2 million “educated” people unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
* Defenseless people rounded up & exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million at a bare minimum.
* During W.W. II the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED.
Note: Admiral Yamamoto, who crafted the attack on Pearl Harbor, had attended Harvard University from 1919 to 1921 and was a Naval Attache to the U.S. from 1925-28. Most of our Navy was destroyed at Pearl Harbor, and our Army had been deprived of funding and was ill prepared to defend the country. It was reported that when asked why Japan did not follow up the Pearl Harbor attack with an invasion of the U.S. Mainland, his reply was that he had lived in the U.S. and knew that almost all households had guns.
* Gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The first year results: Australia-wide, homicides went up 3.2 percent; Australia-wide, assaults went up 8.6 percent; Australia-wide, armed robberies went up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent). While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady DECREASE in armed robbery with firearms, that changed drastically upward in the first year after gun confiscation… since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed; There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults on the Elderly. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort & expense was expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns. The Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it.
With guns…. We are “citizens”.
Without Them…. We are “subjects”.
WE THE PEOPLE do not give our government the right to track our every movement and location, registration of our personal property, track commerce of our personal propery, keep our personal identification information (or property {whether firearms or ammunition} or possessions) in a federal or state database, the federal government to run laws in our state or local municipalities, or confiscate our firearms for any reason. We are not criminals, and WE THE PEOPLE do not give the government the right to treat us as such.
The undersigned.
——————————————————————————–
From March 8 to April 20 of this year the independent, nonpartisan legislative tracking website GovTrack.us ran a unique experiment to see if constituent communication with Congress could be more efficient by aggregating voices, but in a more thoughtful way than a simple petition. During this time, visitors to the site who opposed H.R. 45 came together to draft a letter to Congress collaboratively. Using the democratic, collaborative writing tools at MixedInk.com, 454 individuals wrote, edited, and rated letters. Some 214 drafts were considered, but this is the top-rated one at the end of the process. For more information on this letter and the experiment, please see http://www.govtrack.us/special/hr45mixedink.xpd.
GovTrack doesn’t endorse the content of this letter. We’re just facilitating an experiment in communicating with Congress.
About GovTrack.us: GovTrack.us is a tool to help the public research and track the activities in the U.S. Congress, promoting government transparency and civic education through novel uses of technology. The site includes the status of U.S. federal legislation and voting records and is a (totally free) tracking service, with personalized feeds and email updates, widgets, and other tools. An independent, non-partisan, non-commercial, and open-source website launched in 2004, GovTrack.us was the first website whose primary goal was to provide comprehensive legislative tracking for everyday citizens and was the first congressional transparency website to embrace Web 2.0 and principles of open data.
About MixedInk.com: MixedInk provides web-based collaborative writing software that enables government agencies, advocacy groups, publishers, companies, and schools to manage large volumes of stakeholder input, harness their communities’ collective wisdom, and engage their constituencies in meaningful conversation. MixedInk’s democratic software empowers very large groups of people to speak with a collective voice by weaving their ideas and opinions together into a single text. The platform is free to use at MixedInk.com and to embed directly within any website. The company also offers a white-label enterprise service for seamless integration with existing sites.