HR 45 -- Gun Rights Licensing Test

sapo · Post by **sapo** » January 22nd, 2009, 12:10 am

2. HR 45 -- Gun Rights Licensing Test
Illinois congressman Bobby Rush, from Obama's home state and with a voting record on gun ownership as bad as Obama's, introduced a bill on the first day of the 111th Congress that shows what we can expect. If we don't defeat this bill, and others expected to follow it, gun owners will lose guns and the industry will suffer harm beyond description.
Under HR 45, if you can't pass a complex test written by the U.S. Attorney General (described in detail below), pay the tax, give up fingerprints and a biometric-capable photo of yourself (that can be turned into a digital facial-recognition number and used as a de facto national ID), every gun you own will become contraband and subject to confiscation, while you stand trial before imprisonment. You'd think Bobby, a former black panther, would know better.
Your rights will have an expiration date, and if you screw up and miss it, you'll be in the same mess as people who can't pass the test. Can you say "unconstitutional"? Do you think these "gun bigots" care?
Now that the Supreme Court has made it clear in the Heller case that government can't ban guns, the Brady's have stopped saying they want to ban guns. So the virtually treasonous Bobby Rush bill doesn't ban guns, it bans gun owners, maybe by the millions. How many gun owners read poorly or don't test well? How many can't explain local, state and federal gun laws? They'd become prohibited possessors under HR 45. Are there any limits to what the AG can put on the test? The bill doesn't mention any -- it gives the AG a free hand to include anything.
Had enough? HR 45 has an innocent-looking line that says 'strike the second sentence of 18 USC 926(a)'. That's the line that says the federal government cannot make a central registry of gun owners.
The anti-rights people have to repeal that line, because Bobby's bill flat-out creates a central gun registry. Every gun owner must be registered to keep on possessing the guns they already own, and any transfer of any kind must be registered as well. The mark of the beast is upon us, to apply a metaphor.
See the bill for yourself (click "Bill Number" and enter "HR 45"):
http://pagenine.typepad.com/page_nine/2 ... rt-ii.html

breeze · Post by **breeze** » January 22nd, 2009, 6:06 pm

This may sound strange, but there has been so much put forward by this new regime that is so absolutely unamerican, that I am almost looking forward to becoming an outlaw. I refuse to obey simply because it is commanded. I know the difference between right and wrong. I am right and the liberals are wrong...period. I will fight them, any way needed. NO ONE is going to take my liberty.

I sincerely understand your frustration

blinddog · Post by **blinddog** » January 22nd, 2009, 10:36 pm

I think the pro gun lobby is going to win. We are smarter than they are. Join the NRA if you are not already a member. I have faith in the good ole american, just because he/she doesn't back down.

blinddog

bob · Post by **bob** » February 2nd, 2009, 4:11 pm

First let me say that I am not a prejudiced person so do not misunderstatnd what I am about to say.The liberals beleive eveyone deserves rights:blacks,immigrants,gays etc.EXCEPT gun owners.With guns they make a 380% reversal.No rights for gun owners.I also understand what black people went through with Jim Crow laws that prevented them from voting.It is similar to these punitive laws and taxes they want to levy against gun ownership.It's not to raise legitimate taxes but a punishment against gun ownership.How the courts may let this happen is scary.People should realize if it can be done to us it can be turned on them for whatever reason.Isn't this what Hilter did to the Jews? He made laws to fit his agenda.Didn't we fight ww2 to stop this?The courts better wake up.This partisan bs is crap.Do what is right!!!!

dusty62 · Post by **dusty62** » February 12th, 2009, 9:15 pm

It looks like we really need to be prepared to stand and fight . . . with words first, then with whatever is at hand.

dus'

swd · Post by **swd** » February 14th, 2009, 12:54 am

When they outlaw guns, then I will become an outlaw. In the mean time I did contact my congressman to alert him to this bill. But also, imagine the kaos in trying confiscate all the arms in the USA. I really think there would be war among the masses and law enforcement probably would not have the means to carry it out. Finally, I revert back to my first sentence as my backup.

pshootr · Post by **pshootr** » February 14th, 2009, 4:31 am

Rush is a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, as well as a former member and founder of the Illinois chapter of the Black Panther Party.

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

crzbiker · Post by **crzbiker** » February 14th, 2009, 2:32 pm

If they gave a test for congress there wouldn't be one of those damn fools down there.

dusty62 · Post by **dusty62** » February 14th, 2009, 5:19 pm

crzbiker wrote:If they gave a test for congress there wouldn't be one of those damn fools down there.

Pro being the opposite of con, then congress is definately the opposite of progress. Guess I'll have to stop by the representatives office here in town, too, and make sure he knows my views on this issue. Might be like lighting a match in a gale but worth the try, anyway.

dus'

dusty62 · Post by **dusty62** » February 14th, 2009, 6:02 pm

Ok, now I've gone and actually read the bill. Before it was a scary thing. This bill is truly an afront to anyone who spent time serving their country in any branch of the U.S. military, because it clearly attempts to neutralize one of the constitutionally guaranteed rights we enjoy in this country . . . that to keep and bear arms. How did that oath go? " . . . to protect and defend the constitution of the United States of America, against all enemys, foreign and domestic . . ." With the introduction of this bill, it would seem that Mr. Brown clearly qualifies as the latter of these two identified enemies of the United States of America. I sincerely hope that that oathed pledge to "defend" doesn't have to come into play yet again. One can only pray that congress will have the sense to see that this bill is truly unconstitutional and not give it a chance to breathe it's ugly breath on this great nation.

dus'

lagavulin62 · Post by **lagavulin62** » February 14th, 2009, 6:53 pm

this is something I have never understood. if you research the history of gun control in america it dates back to primarily after the civil war and it's main purpose was to disarm the freed blacks. in the 60's with all the race riots and assasinations, gun control was extended and it's main purpose was undoubtedly to keep control of activist blacks. now here is a man who supposedly is fighting for "his people" yet in his own district which is approximately 65 % black and poor living in a high crime rate area of south chicago he wants to disarm them. and this same district helps elect the first black president who wants to disarm us all. yet they are both heros in black culture. just doesn't make much sense to me. I was at a gun show this morning and I would estimate that 95% of attendees were white males. it would seem the pro gun groups need to do a better job of capturing minority(and mainly black) support. I honestly find it hard to believe there are not more black and hispanic gun supporters out there. .... as for the bill, well if you spend any amount of time reading the congressional quarterly you might be surprised to read the number of totally ridiculous bills that are presented, most of which will never have a chance in &ell of passing. I'm not trying to disregard this threat, it is real, but as another poster commented, looks like the pro gun rally is doing good things now. but I would just feel better if they would work harder to include more minorities. just my thoughts

dusty62 · Post by **dusty62** » February 15th, 2009, 12:22 am

lagavulin62, you make a very interesting point. I live in an area that is mostly rural and hunting is a very major part of the culture up here. Hence, most gun owners are so because they use them for hunting. While I have seen some non-caucasion persons who do hunt, they are certainly a minority in the hunting lifestyle as it is represented up here in Michigan's Upper Peninsula. But, in my travels throughout the U.S. I don't recollect really knowing or even knowing of many non-caucasion gun enthusiasts. I'm sure that there are many but they definately don't seem to have a significant presence. It is quite curious. Food for thought because I think that there certainly must be a representation from just about every race who are pro gun in this country. You definately got me thinking with that last post of yours.

dus'

bob · Post by **bob** » February 16th, 2009, 10:28 am

We need to convince our congressmen and senators.Supprt the NRA they are our lobbyist.Individually we can not do as much but in numbers thru an organization we have a better chance.I know the NRA is a nuisance sometime with all their solicitations but you don't have give all the time.I contribute what I can when I can.If it comes down to fighting in the streets it's too late anyway.Plus I could not shoot a policeman just trying to do his job.He was sworn to uphold the law.He can't pick and choose which ones.Unfortunetly we are law abiding citizens.That is our mind set.That is why we aquire our guns legally.Some complain about America.There is nothing wrong with our form of governmant or the principals upon which we were founded.It is the abuse and misuse of power by the politicians.Most are either incompetant or downright corrupt.Maybe this guy Rush wants guns out of the hands of legitimate gun owners to protect the criminals.Black,white or other.

Post by **papabear** » February 16th, 2009, 12:54 pm

I use to work a live in Ill, its a Gestapo state, when I retired I immediately moved back to Ky to where I belong because its a gun friendly state.

Here's what I think of HR 45 for there are any where else, "SCREW EM AND THE HORSE THEY CAME IN ON"

Papabear

dusty62 · Post by **dusty62** » February 16th, 2009, 8:57 pm

papabear wrote:I use to work a live in Ill, its a Gestapo state, when I retired I immediately moved back to Ky to where I belong because its a gun friendly state.

Here's what I think of HR 45 for there are any where else, "SCREW EM AND THE HORSE THEY CAME IN ON"

Papabear

Hear hear, Papabear. I don't know much about Ill., but things're gettin' a bit quirky here in MI, too. Not just gun laws, but all around.

On another note, I didn't get the fella's name but I agree with you, too, about not wanting to take up arms against a police officer or some such, who is only doing a job by upholding the laws. I certainly won't get into a debate about the efficacy of our LEO's when it comes to that . . . to each their own opinion . . . but I side with you in your stated sentiment.

We all know that legally purchased firearms aren't the problem at all. It's the illegally gained firearms that are used in various and sundry criminal acts that cause the issue with the gun control mindset. Then, when a legally registered and owned firearm is used in an incident, they all go CRAZY in pointing out that the current registration system isn't adequate and we need to have more stringent laws. It's all malarkey. All of their legislation and restrictions will still not slow the criminal down one iota. NRA, congressmen/women, we as an interested group have to stand together to the forefront to protect what little we have left of our rights as gun owners. And no, I'm not advocating "fighting in the streets," but rather a war of words on capitol hill. But then, I believe that we are all stating the same idea, albeit with different words. Actively engaging the politicians we've elected (or who were elected despite our best attempts) is the first defense we have.

dus'

The Unofficial P64 Resource Forum