![[SeMissourian.com]](http://www.marshallnews.com/images/nameplate.png)
RSS
Print
Email link
Respond to editor
Read comments (7)
Share link
del.icio.us
Digg
StumbleUpon
Technorati
Newsvine
Facebook
Furl
Reddit
GoogleIf this bill makes it through Congress, it will amend the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act. The end product would be a bill that would 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.
The bill calls for license application, issuance and renewal requirements. It also 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.
The bill also calls for firearms transfer reporting and record keeping requirements and directs the attorney general to establish and maintain a federal "record of sale" system.
In addition, the bill would: (1) prohibit 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) prohibit a licensed manufacturer or dealer from failing to comply with reporting and record keeping requirements of this act; (3) prohibit failing to report the loss or theft of the firearm to the attorney general within 72 hours; (4) prohibit failing to report to the attorney general an address change within 60 days; or (5) prohibit keeping a loaded firearm, or an unloaded firearm and ammunition for the firearm, knowingly or recklessly disregarding the risk that a child (anyone under 18 years of age) is capable of gaining access, if a child uses the firearm and causes death or serious bodily injury.
The bill also prescribes criminal penalties for violations of firearms provisions covered by this Act and 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.
In summary, the bill would make it illegal to own a firearm -- any rifle with a clip or any pistol unless
--You are fingerprinted.
--You supply a current driver's license.
--You supply your Social Security number.
--You promise to submit to a physical and mental evaluation at any time the government sees fit.
--You report any address change or change in gun ownership -- through private or public sale -- and pay a fee of $25 for each change.
Section 2.b of H.R. 45 provides, in one fell swoop, the authority of the federal government to supersede the individual states on the matter of gun control and declares that gun control is to be left to the federal government because the states are in need of federal supervision in this regard. It further states that the citizens stand in need of education (as dictated by this legislation).
It is reported that this bill also states that failure to abide by these rules would cause the gun owner to automatically lose the right to own a firearm and said owner would be subject to a year in jail.
As of February 2009, the bill had been referred to the House Judiciary Committee, where it was subsequently referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
As President Lyndon Baines Johnson once famously said, "Boys, I may not know much, but I know chicken (poop) from chicken salad." This bill may look like salad to many, but I believe it reeks of something much more foul.
Everyone who enjoys the Second Amendment guarantee of the right to keep and bear arms -- whether for hunting, shooting sports or self-defense and home protection, needs to contact their legislators to oppose this bill.
If it becomes law, I believe it may well be the beginning of the disarming of America.
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. If you feel that a comment is offensive, please
Oops. "H"R. Pesky keyboard...
klop: First, my apologies for throwing down the gauntlet in the manner in which I did. Second: Population Control explained...
Limiting or restricting the rights of responsible gun owners will do nothing, in my opinion, to curb violent crimes. The "root" or "denominator" will always be present and common. That is, the human consequence.
Each of us possess the ability to be violent--even to kill if necessary. If you have children, imagine walking upon one of them in the process of being brutally violated. I think if you are honest with yourself, you will admit that you, too, are capable of violence--albeit justifiable in this scenario. I could justify my actions to myself in such a case...without question.
So if we can agree that the *real* issue is the human factor, then we must agree that firearms are merely a means to an end for some individuals. For others it's knives, baseball bats, even automobiles. Nearly every thing at your immediate disposal has the potential to be used as a weapon--whether to commit a crime, or to prevent one. Shall we then allow our government to require a license and mental evaluation to possess, say, a pop or soda can? The aluminum could easily be torn into a jagged edge and used as a weapon. For $5.98 at Wal-Mart, I could buy enough weaponry to slaughter 24 people. I'm being ridiculous in this example for a reason.
To remove--or even reduce--the amount of violence in our society has but one hope: Literally remove or reduce the number of people CAPABLE of violence....which is pretty much every living soul.
Perhaps *people* should each be licensed as the "real" lethal weapon, since each of us possesses "the ability" to be harmful or fatal to one another. Shall we then let any bureaucracy or government determine who receives the license? Shall we let our government decide who meets the eligibility requirements, or worse--who does *not*? And what is to become of those who do not meet the requirements of the license? Population control. If responsible gun owners will be penalized and restricted for what *could* happen, shouldn't we all then be penalized and restricted for our own human potential?
In my (far-reaching) opinion, the possible ramifications of a bill like NR-45 extend far beyond the surface issue of gun ownership, and straight into the likelihood of one day depriving us all of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness...if you really want a cure for violence, that is. Will you trade one constitutionally protected right for another?
Then again--why NOT let the government control us? We've not done a very good job of it ourselves lately. As I said earlier, firearms have changed very little in their concept over the last three centuries: gunpowder, lead, trigger, barrel, boom. It is OUR propensity for violence as a collective society that has escalated.
What's more tragic is that History is neither taught or learned in this country - I speak from being a product of public education (30 year ago) and after having read 250+ history books in the last 3 years, most Americans don't know jack (about history), even with a 4 year degree. A 'Disney' version of History is taught in high school and none taught at University unless you are history major.
For example, WHY is it The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution? And Why was it even included in the Amendments? When Hitler came to power, he removed guns from the public's hands - the rest was easy.
Bit by bit, individual rights, States rights and property rights are being eroded in favor of Federal laws. There was a reason why the founding fathers limited the federal government in favor of States rights/laws - it's right there in the history books.
If we don't know history, we ARE doomed to repeat it. Tragic IF we have to repeat it.
Far be it for an honest citizen to own a gun. Why should we be concerned with this law? It worked so well when they banned guns in D.C. and Chicago. Wait, isn't this bill named for someone killed by a criminal in Chicago with an already illegal handgun? Maybe if the ban doesn't work in D.C. or Chicago we should make it nationwide so that all citizens should fear for their lives from the criminals that don't pay attention to the laws in the first place. Compare the crime stats of D.C. or Chicago with VA where a citizen has the right to carry a gun openly or to apply for a conceal carry permit and submit to a background check above the one they have to go through when they legally purchase a firearm. The criminals, who don't apply to carry a concealed firearm legally or even legally purchase their weapon, have to wonder if the person they may try to make their victim may actually be able to defend themselves. The crime rate is higher where the criminals know that their victims can not defend themselves.
This bill is DOA.
He's always so afraid someone is going to be taking his guns. Interesting fear to have.
Making sure gun owners are responsible individuals.....tragic....just tragic...