Do you know your Congress(wo)man? - Miata Turbo Forum - Boost cars, acquire cats.

Welcome to Miataturbo.net   Members
 


Insert BS here A place to discuss anything you want

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-27-2009, 11:22 PM   #1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Alamo City, Tejas
Posts: 774
Total Cats: 1
Default Do you know your Congress(wo)man?

It looks as if the first attempt of this Administration to compromise the Second Amendment has started:

OpenCongress - U.S. Congress - H.R.45 Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009


- L
l_bader is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2009, 11:50 PM   #2
y8s
2 Props,3 Dildos,& 1 Cat
iTrader: (8)
 
y8s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fake Virginia
Posts: 19,038
Total Cats: 407
Default

just a point of note here... Bobby Rush is not part of the administration, he's part of Congress.

and he has been in congress since he assumed his office in 1993.

In any case, just because it was introduced doesn't mean it's a law. thousands are introduced in every session of congress and only a tiny percentage of them are passed.
y8s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 12:57 AM   #3
Tour de Franzia
iTrader: (6)
 
hustler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Republic of Dallas
Posts: 29,114
Total Cats: 351
Default

Texas democrat crew signing in!

guns and social services ftw!
hustler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 04:18 AM   #4
Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 1,378
Total Cats: 0
Default

Isn't exactly a radical bill. Only real part to dislike is this

"keeping a loaded firearm, or an unloaded firearm and ammunition for the firearm, knowingly or recklessly disregarding the risk that a child is capable of gaining access, if a child uses the firearm and causes death or serious bodily injury."

That seems to be pretty vague wording. But otherwise as I have said time and time again, your gun rights are protected by the constitution, they aren't going away any time soon. Heller v District of Columbia was proof of that. Be more worried of things that aren't covered under the constitution, such as the right to privacy.
naarleven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 04:33 AM   #5
Elite Member
iTrader: (5)
 
akaryrye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Central California
Posts: 2,526
Total Cats: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by naarleven View Post
such as the right to privacy.
The bush administration did no good for privacy that I am aware of
akaryrye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 04:53 AM   #6
Junior Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Brunswick, Maryland
Posts: 262
Total Cats: 0
Default

Ahh...you must be referring to the wire tap laws. Sorry to tell you folks...lines were tapped long before that. That law jst allows the government to use those recording against you in court...instead of simply catching you doing something.
boardboy330 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 04:58 AM   #7
Murderator
iTrader: (76)
 
18psi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 36,196
Total Cats: 2,583
Default

oh boy another political thread.
18psi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 09:06 AM   #8
Elite Member
iTrader: (30)
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Va Beach
Posts: 7,282
Total Cats: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 18psi View Post
oh boy another political thread.
I love them! I get to see other peoples point of view and i do actually learn alot from them.

Keep it coming guys.



<--- Anxiously awaiting a thread discussing this $825 billion(now 900) economic "recovery/stimulus" package.
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
levnubhin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 10:27 AM   #9
Tour de Franzia
iTrader: (6)
 
hustler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Republic of Dallas
Posts: 29,114
Total Cats: 351
Default

if it passes, we should throw another "tea party."
hustler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 11:34 AM   #10
y8s
2 Props,3 Dildos,& 1 Cat
iTrader: (8)
 
y8s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fake Virginia
Posts: 19,038
Total Cats: 407
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hustler View Post
if it passes, we should throw another "tea party."
I'm surprised DC hasn't already what with their lack of votes.

y8s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 11:39 AM   #11
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,892
Total Cats: 1,792
Default

Maybe they should live in a STATE :P
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 11:42 AM   #12
y8s
2 Props,3 Dildos,& 1 Cat
iTrader: (8)
 
y8s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fake Virginia
Posts: 19,038
Total Cats: 407
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
Maybe they should live in a STATE :P
well when DC was planned, it was supposed to be a govt only region--no residents. things change. now it's half a million people.

anyway, I moved to a state and it turned blue.
y8s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 12:23 PM   #13
Junior Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Brunswick, Maryland
Posts: 262
Total Cats: 0
Default

Votes alone don't make things happen...money buys votes that make things happen.
boardboy330 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 03:18 PM   #14
Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 1,378
Total Cats: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by boardboy330 View Post
Ahh...you must be referring to the wire tap laws. Sorry to tell you folks...lines were tapped long before that. That law jst allows the government to use those recording against you in court...instead of simply catching you doing something.
Because the constitution never expressly says anything about a right to privacy. Its a political tradition. Can be turned around any
day.

Quote:
Originally Posted by akaryrye View Post
The bush administration did no good for privacy that I am aware of
I never said they were. In fact they notoriously broke the tradition. But hey, its constitutional.
naarleven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 03:44 PM   #15
Supporting Vendor
iTrader: (31)
 
Savington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 14,367
Total Cats: 1,331
Default

evict alaska and promote washington DC.
Savington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 04:19 PM   #16
Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 1,378
Total Cats: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Savington View Post
evict alaska and promote washington DC.
Make sure we take all the nukes outta there before Palin becomes president though.
naarleven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 04:42 PM   #17
I EAT CUM
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Redneck, Texas
Posts: 1,218
Total Cats: -1
Default

I met someone locally that ran, the name was Ralph Shefield. Biggest douchebag known to mankind. I voted against him just because of his ******* attitude.
Turbo_4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 06:28 PM   #18
Elite Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,997
Total Cats: 1
Default

I don't really see anything in that bill that seems like they are inhibiting your 2nd amendment rights. Just seems to be enforcing mandatory responsibility for handgun ownership.
johndoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 08:52 PM   #19
I'm Miserable!
iTrader: (5)
 
bryantaylor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: jacksonville, fl
Posts: 1,720
Total Cats: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by boardboy330 View Post
Ahh...you must be referring to the wire tap laws. Sorry to tell you folks...lines were tapped long before that. That law jst allows the government to use those recording against you in court...instead of simply catching you doing something.
also, its only wire taping on corded phone. privacy laws doesn't apply to cordless phones/cell phones because they broadcast over radio waves, which are public.
bryantaylor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 11:19 PM   #20
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Alamo City, Tejas
Posts: 774
Total Cats: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by y8s View Post
just a point of note here... Bobby Rush is not part of the administration, he's part of Congress... and he has been in congress since he assumed his office in 1993.
Agreed, he is a long standing member of Congress. I just see him acting as an agent for the new Administration. In that (a) there is no co-sponsor, (b) there is no grandfathering and (c) this puts a large burden on the Attorney General's office, I expect this is more of a "feeler" than anything else. - Fire a test shot and see how quickly it gets shot down, then lower the bar and repeat until you get one passed as law.


Quote:
Originally Posted by y8s View Post
In any case, just because it was introduced doesn't mean it's a law. thousands are introduced in every session of congress and only a tiny percentage of them are passed.
...hence the reason to (a) stay aware of what the politicians are attempting and (b) contact them expressing your support or dissent with their intended actions.


Quote:
Originally Posted by naarleven View Post
Isn't exactly a radical bill. Only real part to dislike is this

"keeping a loaded firearm, or an unloaded firearm and ammunition for the firearm, knowingly or recklessly disregarding the risk that a child is capable of gaining access, if a child uses the firearm and causes death or serious bodily injury."

That seems to be pretty vague wording. But otherwise as I have said time and time again, your gun rights are protected by the constitution, they aren't going away any time soon. Heller v District of Columbia was proof of that. Be more worried of things that aren't covered under the constitution, such as the right to privacy.
The draconian restrictions on firearms in Australia, England, Germany and other countries started with similar laws.

The protective portion of this proposal already exists. Child safety is a major portion of gun friendly states (such as Texas) laws and ordinances; more so in non-gun friendly states (CA, MA, etc...)

The contenscious portions of this proposals are:

ITEM-A - The registering (mandatory licensing) of ALL firearms owners.
"It shall be unlawful for any person other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector to possess a qualifying firearm on or after the applicable date, unless that person has been issued a firearm license"

With said licensing dependant upon:
"(7) a certificate attesting to the completion at the time of application of a written firearms examination, which shall test the knowledge and ability of the applicant regarding--

(A) the safe storage of firearms, particularly in the vicinity of persons who have not attained 18 years of age;

(B) the safe handling of firearms;

(C) the use of firearms in the home and the risks associated with such use;

(D) the legal responsibilities of firearms owners, including Federal, State, and local laws relating to requirements for the possession and storage of firearms, and relating to reporting requirements with respect to firearms; and

(E) any other subjects, as the Attorney General determines to be appropriate;"


And requiring you PAY for exercising your Second Amendment RIGHT:
" (1) IN GENERAL- The Attorney General shall charge and collect from each applicant for a license under this title a fee ... not (to) exceed $25."


ITEM-B - The registering of ALL weapons by ALL owners tracking ALL sales; even from individual to individual:
"(bb) Unauthorized Sale or Transfer of a Qualifying Firearm- It shall be unlawful for any person to sell, deliver, or otherwise transfer a qualifying firearm to, or for, any person who is not a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector, or to receive a qualifying firearm from a person who is not a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector, unless, at the time and place of the transfer or receipt--

‘(1) the transferee presents to a licensed dealer a valid firearm license issued to the transferee--

‘(A) under title I of Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009; or

‘(B) pursuant to a State firearm licensing and record of sale system certified under section 602 of Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009 established by the State in which the transfer or receipt occurs;

‘(2) the licensed dealer contacts the Attorney General or the head of the State agency that administers the certified system described in paragraph (1)(B), as applicable, and receives notice that the transferee has been issued a firearm license described in paragraph (1) and that the license remains valid; and

‘(3) the licensed dealer records on a document (which, in the case of a sale, shall be the sales receipt) a tracking authorization number provided by the Attorney General or the head of the State agency, as applicable, as evidence that the licensed dealer has verified the validity of the license.’."


and MAINTAINS RECORDS of the transaction(s), REGISTERED with the AG:
" (a) Submission of Sale or Transfer Reports- Not later than 14 days after the date on which the transfer of qualifying firearm is processed by a licensed dealer under section 922(bb) of title 18, United States Code (as added by section 201 of this Act), the licensed dealer shall submit to the Attorney General (or, in the case of a licensed dealer located in a State that has a State firearm licensing and record of sale system certified under section 602 of this Act, to the head of the State agency that administers that system) a report of that transfer, which shall include information relating to--

(1) the manufacturer of the firearm;

(2) the model name or number of the firearm;

(3) the serial number of the firearm;

(4) the date on which the firearm was received by the transferee;

(5) the number of a valid firearm license issued to the transferee under title I of this Act; and

(6) the name and address of the individual who transferred the firearm to the transferee.

(b) Federal Record of Sale System- Not later than 9 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall establish and maintain a Federal record of sale system, which shall include the information included in each report submitted to the Attorney General under subsection (a).

(c) Elimination of Prohibition on Establishment of System of Registration- Section 926(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking the second sentence."

(Note the required change to USC 18...)

Failing to track and register sales in accordance with this leads to:
"Whoever knowingly violates subsection (aa), (bb), or (dd) of section 922 shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both."


Quote:
Originally Posted by johndoe View Post
I don't really see anything in that bill that seems like they are inhibiting your 2nd amendment rights. Just seems to be enforcing mandatory responsibility for handgun ownership.
The "(E) any other subjects, as the Attorney General determines to be appropriate;" allows great lattitude in limiting access to Second Amendment. As well can mandatory licensing and a Federal tracking system for all gun owners.

This Bill proposes to make it more difficult for law abiding members of society to exercise their rights and won't do a thing to prevent criminals from continuing to violate weapons laws.


- L
l_bader is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
[CT] 1999 Mazda Miata 10th Anniversary Edition - $5800 Jike Spingleton Cars for sale/trade 3 09-20-2016 05:33 PM
WTB HPDE miata - Texas Voltwings Cars for sale/trade 0 09-27-2015 07:40 PM
Can't Wait for 949 Clutch Anymore concealer404 Suspension, Brakes, Drivetrain 126 09-18-2015 09:45 PM
built motor parts all new! Shortpersonbk Miata parts for sale/trade 3 09-12-2015 12:39 AM
Oregon New Guy Wino Meet and Greet 7 08-29-2015 03:26 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:37 PM.