Just when you thought he had done his worst, Obama has a little surprise for you.

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


So you now hate Jefferson and the bill of rights also? I guess it was Illegal for him to be president?

Thomas Jefferson founded the Democratic Party in 1792 as a congressional caucus to fight for the Bill of Rights and against the elitist Federalist Party.

www.democrats.org...

reply to post by Doc Velocity


Teach me, oh wise one, that I too may confound those who profess to lead us to utopia by depriving us of our constitutional and God given rights. I too, want to learn which buttons to push, so that we will know them by their bald, bleeding scalps.

You really got to love it....

Text of H.R. 45: Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009

Jan 6, 2009 - Introduced in House. This is the original text of the bill as it was written by its sponsor and submitted to the House for consideration. This is the latest version of the bill currently available on GovTrack.

www.govtrack.us...

But hey the bill doesn't exist...and it doesn't matter that most, if not all Obamatron officials are advocates of gun control, apart from being advocates of giving up U.S. sovereingty to the U.N.....not to mention that we still have a mayority Democrat/Progressive House and Senate.....



[edit on 19-1-2010 by ElectricUniverse]

You can check on the following link that this is still in Congress and was referred to Committe...

Last Action: Feb 9, 2009: Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.

www.govtrack.us...

But hey... some people claim you should only worry AFTER such bills have been passed and not BEFORE....

Originally posted by whoshotJR

Originally posted by Seiko
reply to post by whoshotJR

 

I'm finding the same thing you are?

Snopes is claiming this as only partly true because it is a proposed bill. I also do not see a connection to obama? It's listed as the blair holt bill, it's been around since 2007, with little to no progress.

It wont matter though, people will star and flag and reply but not even read all that he wrote or the links... or what you and I posted.

I was starting to feel like I was in Bizarro world though, thank you for showing I may not be the insane one.

The article is from Feb 2009.

From the Senate Reference site

Link

Quote
Is it true that . . . Senate Bill SB-2099 will require owners of firearms to pay a $50 charge per gun and list each gun on their federal tax form?

The answer is no. This Internet rumor states that SB-2099 is legislation currently being considered by the Senate. The bill supposedly requires owners of firearms to list on their 1040 tax return all guns they own and then pay a $50 charge per firearm. There is no such legislation by this name in the 111th Congress.

The facts:

* Legislation that the Senate is currently working on will be listed on the Active Legislation page or can be searched for on Thomas. For more information about the legislative process or finding bills, please see the Legislation VRD page.

End Quote

I don't believe the OP, or anyone else read the article? or did a cursory search.

Ziggy Strange

reply to post by whoshotJR


hate him? not really, but he did a disservice to the Republic when he decided to form the Democrat party when even he had agreed that the one form of government that shall be guaranteed should be a Republican form of government....

Republican means "advocate of the Republic, and against all forms of dictatorship".... The U.S. is a REPUBLIC after all....

BTW, Jefferson also had slaves when the Constitution gives all people, nomatter the race, a right to liberty and the pursuit of happinness, among other rights....

Thomas Jefferson was known to flip flop quite a bit... Sometimes he spoke in favor of a democracy, and at other times he spoke against a Democracy....

After all, it was Thomas Jefferson who said...

“A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.”
Thomas Jefferson quotes (American 3rd US President (1801-09). Author of the Declaration of Independence. 1762-1826)

thinkexist.com...



[edit on 19-1-2010 by ElectricUniverse]

reply to post by nixie_nox


I certainly know better than to be that naive. I know thugs work on both sides of the counter. My point is that if they make laws like this, thugs won't be registering their weapons. And they'll simply laugh at all the suddenly financially broke law abiding citizens who decided to do the "right" thing.

Laws are followed by people who are willing to follow them. I won't complicate that. Criminals break laws. They won't register their weapons. They don't obtain them legally. And the only way to find out if people have them, in such a drastic case, would be to do a home to home search.

Hmm.. I wonder how American people would feel about that?

Gun control of any sort is a bad idea in my opinion. Our founding fathers created the 2nd Amendment for a reason. The biggest of which IS the government. And also for personal protection against criminals who are intent to harm others.

I don't even own a weapon, but I am very adamant about people having the right to own them.

My view: It's none of the government's business. Unless of course, they plan to try and throw us into FEMA death camps.

..But that's a whole other thread.

Why do i feel the consensus here on ATS that everybody should have the right to own a gun for protection. I can understand why you would want to have a gun in this moment of time, but.. GUNS KILL AND ONLY KILL Realize! It is in no way good, ethical or in any way positive to use weapons, don't be proud of it!

Originally posted by Evolutionairy
Why do i feel the consensus here on ATS that everybody should have the right to own a gun for protection. I can understand why you would want to have a gun in this moment of time, but.. GUNS KILL AND ONLY KILL Realize! It is in no way good, ethical or in any way positive to use weapons, don't be proud of it!

Hi E,

Different reasons but not universal at ATS.

Some feel it's their right, and it is for the most part. (no personal nukes, ect..)
Some are fearful of the GOV
Some are just fearful
Some are watchful of the GOV
Some are thugs
Some are nuts

I'm for "sane" right to bear arms, and that has, and will get me attacked here.

Different strokes.......


Ziggy Strange

[edit on 19-1-2010 by ziggystrange]

Originally posted by Evolutionairy
Why do i feel the consensus here on ATS that everybody should have the right to own a gun for protection. I can understand why you would want to have a gun in this moment of time, but.. GUNS KILL AND ONLY KILL Realize! It is in no way good, ethical or in any way positive to use weapons, don't be proud of it!

For crying out loud...don't you understand that IT IS A RIGHT GIVEN BY THE CONSTITUTION?....

People who are intent on killing innocent people will find ways to do it... Look at how passenger planes were used to kill 4,000 + people....are you going to ban passenger planes?....

Anyone can make a molotov cocktail from wine, or some other alcoholic beverage, they can lock people in a theater/cinema/club or whatever and set afire the whole place and murder dozens if not hundreds of people.... Are you going to ban alcohol of all types too?...

MANY people have been saved from being raped, or murdered by owning firearms, but of course someone like you would rather let your sister, mother, wife, or daughter being raped, or even your son, or yourself being raped and murdered than actually having a firearm to defend yourself....

BTW, the main reason the forefathers gave us the right to own and bear arms was so that the government would not turn tyrannical...

Obviously people like you don't even understand that even Gandhi himself stated in his autobiography the following....

The leaders of our freedom struggle recognised this, even Gandhi the foremost practitioner of passive resistance and non-violence had this to say about the British policy of gun-control in India:

"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest. " -- Mahatma Gandhi (An Autobiography OR The story of my experiments with truth, by M.K. Gandhi, p.238)

www.abhijeetsingh.com...


[edited for errors]

[edit on 19-1-2010 by ElectricUniverse]

Originally posted by ziggystrange
.............
I'm for "sane" right to bear arms, and that has, and will get me attacked here.

Different strokes.......

Ah, i guess the Second Amendment specifies something about "sane right to bear arms" whatever that means...

So tell us, what is a "sane" right to bear arms?.... You do know that in itself sounds nutty right?....

Oh and btw...yeah I guess American citizens are going to start making their own nukes..... It doesn't matter that it takes specialized equipment that is extremely expensive, and extensive knowledge, and it is extremely expensive to refine and store uranium and nukes....

Seriously this claim that Americans will start getting nukes because the Second Amendment gives us the right to bear "ARMS" is what really sounds nutty.....




[edit on 19-1-2010 by ElectricUniverse]

I rarely step inside a thread like this. There are a few points that need to be ironed out, though. And before I get flamed, realize that I am a gun owner and I am a supporter of the ideals that built the USA, and I am an advocate of life and living.

1) Point- This type of legislation looks dangerous to the preservation of our 2nd ammendment right, as interpreted by the letter of the Constitution. Counter- In the meaning of the words, of the Constitution, it's a given that men being equal, are also commonly sensible. With freedom comes responsibility. A person need respect their own rights as well as the rights of their neighbors.

If I own a weapon or two (which I do,) members of my own community may not feel safe or "free" because of their beliefs of abolishing weapons. So, to satisfy the rights of all, by matter of public record, my neighbors can know what I own, and that I am licensed, by a third party, as a responsible owner. All rights are satisfied.

2) Point- The government has no right, by letter of the law, to know what exactly that I own. Counter- If I were to make my own firearm, I do not have to license it. Even by the HR 45 Bill, it states specifically that a firearm is a commercial product. (Yes, I know zip guns are their own can of worms. Just making a point)

And what reasonable person really needs the "freedom" to carry a weapon that is potentially unsafe, especially in the hands of someone without training, into a public space or across state lines. True freedom is the ability to say "Ihave this, I'm travelling here or there, and I know how to use it." More than free, that's responsible; and it let's your other countrymen, that may have opposing views, at least the knowledge that are where you are with whatever it is that they may chose to avoid being around.

3) Anyone that wants freedom without resposibility is actually an advocate of chaos. While chaos may work for rocks and gasses floating through space, it has no place in a society, especially one as great as the USA was and will be again.

Ultimately, if you want to have a weapon, and not register it, or tell anyone that you have it... That's your call. But I prefer to live among other people, with my head held high, knowing that I will enjoy my rights (while they exist) responsibly. As legislation comes down the pipe, I will protest or support, accordingly. If the system goes out the window entirely, well at least I gave an honest fight by the rules that we had all agreed upon. (Then game on if need be)

Support Ron Paul. Support Scott Brown. Support the people that represent you. No matter how scarce they may be becoming.

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

Originally posted by ziggystrange

Snip

Ah, i guess the Second Amendment specifies something about "sane right to bear arms" whatever that means...

So tell us, what is a "sane" right to bear arms?.... You do know that in itself sounds nutty right?....

Oh and btw...yeah I guess American citizens are going to start making their own nukes..... It doesn't matter that it takes specialized equipment that is extremely expensive, and extensive knowledge, and it is extremely expensive to refine and store uranium and nukes....

Seriously this claim that Americans will start getting nukes because the Second Amendment gives us the right to bear "ARMS" is what really sounds nutty.....

[edit on 19-1-2010 by ElectricUniverse]

Hi Electric Universe,

I have no intentions of taking anybody's weapons away, and I love the Constitution as much, or more than you do.

We have no way to determine this either way based on what I said.

Sane means the opposite of insane. I did not say Americans wanted personal nukes. Some probably do.

Instead of flaming each other first, let's find out if we, really disagree. Then you can be justified, if you decide to flame.

So you tell me. Where do you draw the line?

I'll tell you if I think that's like yelling fire in a crowded theater, then you can know we disagree.

Fair enough?

Ziggy Strange



[edit on 19-1-2010 by ziggystrange]

Originally posted by Heros_son
.......................
If I own a weapon or two (which I do,) members of my own community may not feel safe or "free" because of their beliefs of abolishing weapons. So, to satisfy the rights of all, by matter of public record, my neighbors can know what I own, and that I am licensed, by a third party, as a responsible owner. All rights are satisfied.

You have a very messed up view of what freedom is... Yes with freedom comes responsibility, but that responsibility does not mean that every person must know I have a gun, or guns...that in itself goes against the right to privacy...

I guess if we follow your reasoning we MUST know who is gay/lesbian and these people shouldn't have the right to their privacy....

After all, there are people who don't feel safe knowing there are gays/lesbians around them.....right?

I guess by following your reasoning it should be legal for everyone to know your thoughts too...after all you never know who is a nutty and is trying to find ways to kill innocent people.... so the people, and the government have a right to know your thoughts too....right?....

Originally posted by Heros_son
And what reasonable person really needs the "freedom" to carry a weapon that is potentially unsafe, especially in the hands of someone without training, into a public space or across state lines. True freedom is the ability to say "Ihave this, I'm travelling here or there, and I know how to use it."
..

I am sorry but again you have a very messed up view about what freedom is.... How do you know if for example you are letting know a criminal that you have a firearm, and that criminal tries to find a way to get you alone to get your firearm, and to rob you?....

Again we are going back to the fact that your view would then also allow for people to know our thoughts.....just because "you never know what people might be thinking"....

Responsibility is not the act of letting people know you have a firearm, but rather to use it wisely, and when needed....

If you proclaim to everyone that you have a firearm, criminals are also listening and will try to use other tactics to rob you of money, firearm, or life...

Responsibility is knowing and accepting that your actions should be justifiable...if you misuse your firearm, then, and only then does the police/state have the right to imprison you...

But this doesn't mean that the government, or anyone else have the right to know everything about you.... Again this goes against the right to privacy that we are still enjoying.

BTW, yes I know that the government is keeping track of things we buy etc, this in itself is unConstitutional, and has been wrongly allowed to happen...

I also see that you state that we should enjoy the right to bear arms as long as we have it... I say no to this. No matter what we should ALWAYS have the right to bear arms, no matter how many gun-grabbers are in office and try to pass unConstitutional laws...

If any administration passes an unConstitutional law, no matter which one, that administration should accept the fact that they broke the law of the land, and they should pay for it... just like regular citizens have to be responsible and accept "reasonable laws that do not take away any rights as enumerated in the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights within it."



[edit on 19-1-2010 by ElectricUniverse]

reply to post by ziggystrange


Where did I flame you?...

Stating that we should have "sane" right to bear arms is a bit nutty is my opinion, but that is not flaming you.

As for drawing the line on the right of Americans to possess arms, that in itself is infringing in that right...and that is how slowly firearms are completely banned...

Look at australia, and the U.K. among some other countries....

Also note that the forefathers state this right shall not be infringed. Do they say when it should, and when it shouldn't be infringe? no...which means that for no reason shall this right, among others, be infringed upon.

[edit on 19-1-2010 by ElectricUniverse]

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


I didn't say the bill didn't exist, I said its a hoax. You and I and the NRA know it wont pass and probably wont get voted on even like many other things.

I own a gun. I'm for gun rights.

I don't like to make mountains out of molehills and focus my attention on things that don't need it though.

The parties have swapped sides and ideals throughout history so its pretty funny you really feel you can tie yourself so squarely to a party and fight to the death for it. Like republicans haven't tried to sell our rights away any more then democrats or any other party.

I don't know about that tax on firearms. What are they gonna start taxing next? I don't have any problems with random screenings of gun owners though. Or the random home checks to make sure the gun is safely stored away. In fact, I welcome it. Of course only if it really helps and isn't just another bureaucratic expense.

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


Whoa dude. When I have several paragraphs in front of me, I read them all, every sentence. After reading I respond.

I love my rights, and will defend them, as much as you would. I look at the facts entirely though, and I do also consider other people. Living in a vacuum doesn't work. Not for you, me or our constitutional rights.

To get back on topic, if I may.... The op presented a bill. The bill has been on deck since 2000, not 2007 as another had stated. It surfaces from time to time. I believe in privacy, free speech and right to bear arms and all of our rights protected. I dare say that you aren't considering ANY context for those fundamental rights. Please temper your conviction with some reason and context.

Can you shout "FIRE" in a crowd, can you wave a gun at City Hall, can you avoid paying sales tax on a Twinkie? Maybe. But you wouldn't be playing the rules that all the rest of society plays by.

Should the rules change? IMO, yes. I would love less government. I encourage more freedom. To be clear though, more government and an infringement of our freedoms come by way of others acting irresponsibly, and recklessly. So, if you have a good idea or two, maybe do the right thing, for all of us, and get proactive. Flaming on a thread is of no use.

I already regret commenting on this. So flame away, I'm moving on to another subject. If we meet again, please keep your comments in context. You have energy and conviction, don't let bad information ruin your focus or your efforts. Peace.

Originally posted by whoshotJR

I didn't say the bill didn't exist, I said its a hoax. You and I and the NRA know it wont pass and probably wont get voted on even like many other things.

How do you know that for certain?... We have a mayority House, and Senate, not to mention that most, if not all of the Obama staff are advocates of gun control, alongside being advocates of givng away our sovereingty.

Originally posted by whoshotJR
I don't like to make mountains out of molehills and focus my attention on things that don't need it though.

If you feel that way that is fine...but this is NOT a hoax... The bill exists, and it is still being debated...

If they didn't want to pass it you think it would have stayed for this long in Congress?....

You don't think that having such bills in Congress demands your attention that is fine, but you are wrong....

Originally posted by whoshotJR
The parties have swapped sides and ideals throughout history so its pretty funny you really feel you can tie yourself so squarely to a party and fight to the death for it. Like republicans haven't tried to sell our rights away any more then democrats or any other party.

i have said it many times in the past, even the Republican party, at least that in power, has been infiltrated by Liberals/Democrats/Progressives, and has been ocrrupted over time by the Socialist elites in control of the feds, and the economy of this country...

Look at how they have been claiming that the only way to save the nation is to pass more Socialist laws, and to have the state own private companies like GM....

[edit on 19-1-2010 by ElectricUniverse]

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
reply to post by ziggystrange

 

Where did I flame you?...

Stating that we should have "sane" right to bear arms is a bit nutty is my opinion, but that is not flaming you.

As for drawing the line on the right of Americans to possess arms, that in itself is infringing in that right...and that is how slowly firearms are completely banned...

Look at australia, and the U.K. among some other countries....

Also note that the forefathers state this right shall not be infringed. Do they say when it should, and when it shouldn't be infringe? no...which means that for no reason shall this right, among others, be infringed upon.

[edit on 19-1-2010 by ElectricUniverse]

Ok I intepreted it, you got me there.

I completely agree about the U.K. don't know about Australia.

Since you say there is no line, or a line would be unconstitutional, then I have to say.

That's a little nutty.

Ziggy Strange