screw the constitution, screw the 2nd admendment

welcome to the socialist states of america

Totalitarianism in One City: Shreveportâ??s Gun-Grabbing Mayor
by William Norman Grigg
by William Norman Grigg
Recently by William Norman Grigg: An American 'Yezhovschina'?




Any time a motorist is stopped by a police officer, insists Shreveport, Louisiana Mayor Cedric Glover, "Your rights ... have been suspended." This includes not only the freedom of movement, but also, in the event the officer inquires as to whether the driver is carrying a weapon, "Your right to be able to hold on to your weapon and say whether [you] have a weapon or not" â?? as well as the right to retain possession of that weapon, should the officer decide to confiscate it from you.

Should you choose not to answer the question, or answer it in the negative, the officer could still choose, "in the interest of officer safety, to secure you in a safe position" â?? this most likely means outside the car with your hands cuffed behind your back â?? "and then do an appropriate inspection of your vehicle."

The phrase "appropriate inspection" is more honestly rendered "Unconstitutional warrantless search."

Should the police officer then turn up a firearm or other weapon in the car, the driver "would be guilty or potentially guilty of even a more severe offense" than whatever he had allegedly done to precipitate the traffic stop, according to Mayor Glover. Police officers, according to Glover, are invested with "a power that the President of the United States does not have ... and that is the ability to be able to suspend your rights."

This is "one of the things that I say to each and every one of the police officers who graduates from the Shreveport Police Academy since I've been mayor." Fortunately for the public, one supposes, Mr. Glover remembers the lesson that Peter Parker learned from his kindly and sagacious uncle Ben â?? that is, with great power comes great responsibility. "You have to understand there is a great deal of power that is vested within ... the law enforcement personnel of this country," Glover insists. "It's why there is a great deal of responsibility that has to go along with it."

Glover offered those remarkable observations, and many others like them, in a recorded phone call with Shreveport resident Robert Baillio.


Mr. Baillio had called to complain about a recent traffic stop in which an SPD officer, who â?? before dealing with any other matter of business â?? asked if Baillio had a firearm, then temporarily seized it from him.

Louisiana law recognizes the right of the state's residents to carry loaded weapons in their vehicles, and Baillio has a state-issued concealed carry permit â?? that is, a piece of paper in which the state generously recognizes one facet of Baillio's innate right to bear arms.

According to Baillio's account, he was cordial and polite when he was stopped after supposedly neglecting to use a turn signal. That this was almost certainly a pretext stop is illustrated by the fact that Baillio never received a ticket. Supplemental evidence is offered by the fact that the conversation between the officer and Baillio focused entirely on the issue of gun ownership, including a question about Baillio's membership in the National Rifle Association.

Baillio doesn't conceal his NRA membership; it's advertised by a sticker on the rear windshield of his truck, as are his very passionate views of the right to armed self-defense. "Armed We Are Citizens! Un-Armed We Are Subjects!" exclaims another bumper sticker, expressing a core truth of our republican heritage. Yet another sticker displays various kinds and grades of ammunition captioned by the directive, "Celebrate Diversity."

It's the safest of bets that what triggered the stop, as it were, was not a traffic infraction by Baillio, but rather the police officer's conditioned reflex to treat the public expression of pro-gun ownership sentiments as innately suspicious.


In brief, Baillio was a victim of political profiling of the sort being encouraged by the Department of Homeland Security and the totalitarian "watchdog" groups who have spent decades indoctrinating the police.

In his telephone chat with Glover, Baillio â?? who was persistent but unfailingly polite â?? pointed out that he "answered the [officer's] question honestly and he disarmed me."

"Which would be appropriate and proper action, sir," replied Glover. "The fact that you gave the correct answer â?? it simply means that you did what you were supposed to do and that is to give that weapon to the police officer so he could appropriately place it in a place where it would be no threat to you, to him, or to anyone in the general public."

"Well, you know, he still had a gun," observed Baillio, hoping to underscore the fact that guns â?? as objects, rather than actors â?? do not pose a "threat" in and of themselves. "How is he â?? "

"Because he's a police officer," interjected Baillio before he could finish the question. "As I've just related to you, that police officer has powers, sir, that you do not have."

Let's unpack that reply, shall we?

From Glover's perspective, it is only when firearms are in the hands of people other than the state's uniformed enforcers/oppressors that they constitute a threat, not only to the public and those in charge of exercising official violence but also to the private gun owner himself.

Glover, a member of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, clearly believes that any firearms in civilian hands should be considered illicit. This is, in both a cultural and constitutional sense, entirely un-American.

Interestingly, it is in harmony with the UN's position, however, as summarized in the world body's 2000 agitprop film Armed to the Teeth: The World-Wide Plague of Small Arms. That film insists that the only "legal" weapons are those "used by armies and police forces to protect us" â?? as if the word "protection" describes the uses to which weapons are put by the enforcement organs of the criminal states that compose the UN.

It is his attitudes toward civilian firearms ownership and the plenary power of police, not his ethnicity or any similar accident of birth, that would make Glover a very suitable ruler of any of the scores of squalid Third World thugocracies represented in the UN.

According to Glover, a police officer may properly disarm any civilian at any time, and the civilian's duty is to surrender his gun â?? willingly, readily, cheerfully, without cavil or question. This is because police officers, as numinous beings anointed by the Holy State, exude the essence of pure goodness and would never commit acts of criminal violence against disarmed civilians.



the artcle goes on to talk of other civil rights cases brought up against the shreveport PD.

but this is what prompted this: friday i saw the whole whole thing, including the telephone call that was recorded. the mayor said " screw the constitution and screw the 2nd admendment." i unfortunitly cannot find the phone call to post.

if anyone else could find more info and post it please do so.

This also falls under the 4th Amendment protections. You don not have to say a word to a cop other than to identify yourself.

not to mention, the cop either has to tell you that you are or are not receiving a citation and for what. if he says no, then you are free to be on your way, if yes, then you obviously have to wait, but as soon as you have the citation you are free to go.

as far as the mayor, he's scum and should be executed! the voters of that city need to know about this so this type of a$$hole doesn't get elected again.

as for the police, what a joke. they have no judicial authority, there job is to uphold the law, not to try to interpret the law. harrasment is not upholding the law. this makes me angry. anyone in public service that in any way does something that's not for the people should be executed.

as far as our country, what a lost soul she is. barack is even getting harrassed by his own party because he's too much of a "rockstar" and not enough of a president. he's too busy worrying about getting on tv and being popular. i mean hell, in the polls people still like barack the person more than they like barack the president.

not to mention, this shows capitalism at it's finest. the guns are for police and military. where do they suppose these people come from? oh wait, the ordinary citizens! but as soon as these gun companies sell their product to the general public the system doesn't work. these same companies that lobby millions of dollars to politicians legally.

sorry for the rant, but this type of thing really gets under my skin. exactly why this country is going to have a revolution soon rather than later!


-shake

If only this problem were not pervasive at all levels of our government. The worst part of it is that only a tiny fraction of the people seem to care about freedoms which they personally don't have an interest in indulging. "I don't shoot, so what if you can't have a gun. I don't toke, so what if you can't have weed. I like sports and I don't like arts, I'm glad you have to give up your money to build stadiums, just don't make my tax money pay for an auditorium."

I was thinking Saturday about the birth of a nation which is no more. Once there was a nation called The United States of America, founded on the principle that each person is the sole arbiter of his own choices and morality, and the only functions of the state were to protect the citizens against foreign and domestic enemies, provide postal roads, maintain a common currency and standards of weights and measures and enforce contracts. This was to be paid for by tariffs. They pre-emptively nullified all laws the Congress might make which would impede your peaceful activities, movement, commerce, association, assembly, speech, printing (and by logical extension reading), religion, rights to lawfully gained property, and self-protection.

Our nation is still called The United States of America. The Constitution still exists in the National Archives. This is the only vestige of what was once a free nation.

I suppose all the oaths to uphold and defend the Constitution are read very literally as referring to the actual paper on which it is written, rather than it's use as a test of the validity of law. So I suppose as long as they keep it displayed upright instead of put in a shelf and it doesn't actually get physically damaged then they have fulfilled their oath.

Of course, since most people are not targets of government coercion then obviously it isn't really happening. It's never anything but the ranting of kooks until either rebellions break out, people are taxed so heavily they can't buy new flatscreens or pogroms are succesfully carried out and discovered by human rights watchdogs in foreign countries.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by headshake

.....this shows capitalism at it's finest. the guns are for police and military.....

---

i'm not quite sure how you can see this as a product of a capitalistic society. though a capitalistic economy may be subverted by a totalitarian regime, such an economy is essentially egalitarian in nature. it is only human nature that consolidates power under such a system, the forced centralization of power does not exist as it does under a socialist system, the power of the economy is held in the hands of the people instead of just those with political power.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JD1stTimer

The worst part of it is that only a tiny fraction of the people seem to care about freedoms which they personally don't have an interest in indulging.

---

such is always the case before the rise of a totalitarian regime from a free nation. it is our own selfish natures that allows our freedoms to be slowly stripped away from us, each part of society concerning itself only with the furthering of its own agenda at the cost of the freedoms of all others.

i'm not referring to our economy per se, i'm referrering to the fact capitalism is our government. if you believe our econonmy is egalitarian then you are sadly mistaken. there might be the false pretense of egalitarinism, but that's not the way it is.

america is controlled by the large corporations. the large corporations are the ones the make the laws of our contry. lobbying is legal vote buying.

the supreme court already decided that people have the right to bear arms. (there was an argument that this was meant for state militias as opposed to everyday citizens.) so harrassing people over rights which they have, that are "inalienable" is purely capitalistic. it might only be an underlying tone here, but it's there. where do you think the money comes from to pay the mayor of shreveport? why else would this be an issue?

in what country do you live in where we have a choice how money is spent? i didn't vote to give GM money, but the governemnt did it anyway. now they own 60% of GM.

is the federal reserve bank a public institution? no it's private. the whole backbone of our economy is held in check by the private sector.

i do agree that people have the ability to use the economy to make statements, but most people in this country are too lazy, too stupid or just don't care.

does our government care about us? HELL NO! they want us to be sheep. to pay our taxes and be good little soldiers. to not question the system. it's the same reason that the government is scared of art. art has the ability to cross boundries and unify people. putting labels on people, no matter how honest they may be, only creates rifts, which leads to seperation, which, in turn leads to keeping people under the boot of "the man".

our country does use every chance they get to take our rights away. usually with kneejerk reactions. they don't think long term. they don't care. hell, they knew social security would fail when they started it.

it's only human nature to consolidate what power?

i'm not trying to get in a pissing match with you. the bottom line is that everything that happens in this country happens over money. so the very problem with the system is capitalism. that's the reason our founding fathers wrote in such an open ended way. they knew something would go awry. they just never dreamed in a thousand years that it would be our economy, or capitalism, that would be our downfall.


-shake

capitalism is not evil. socialism is not evil. no form of gov't in itself is evil. but all forms of goverment eventually fail and usally fail because of greed.


any way the reason i started this was because i heard that this mayor actyally said screw the constitution, screw the second admendtment. i listened to a radio interveiw with mr baillio and not once did he mention it. so im starting to think the quote was made up. but that still does not excuse his ignorance of americans ,or hell anyone in the US, rights. rumor here in baton rouge is that he was only elected thru the good ol boy network i.e.: he knows everyone in town with money.

corruption ?, in Louisiana politics ? :eek: ... tell me, it's not so ! :wtf: (I lived in Bossier City for awhile, back in the mid-70's, no corruption, there) :S2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by killerweed420

This also falls under the 4th Amendment protections. You don not have to say a word to a cop other than to identify yourself.

---

actually the fourth is unreasonable search and seizure, you're thinking of the fifth which pretains to no self incrimination

There is an entire population in our country that thinks the government should do "everything" for the people, including keep them safe from themselves and every possible mishap. So, they are willing to give away all of our freedoms for their safety.

Case in point, sometime ago I was on a popular web site dedicated to missing children. The prevailing view of posters on that site seemed to be that the government (be it local, state, fed, whatever) should have the absolute right to remove children from any home deemed "unfit" at any time. Who gets to decide "unfit"? This entire attitude scared me to no end and I left that site because my own beliefs are so different. Anyone who reads history knows that totalitarian government always wants to indoctrinate the young. These people truly cannot see where it ultimately leads.

A while back, in a less enlightened time in my life, I thought gun control was a good thing. Then I read a book called, "Unintended Consequences" and I've never looked at things the same.

I'm ready for the revolution.:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by headshake

i'm not referring to our economy per se, i'm referring to the fact capitalism is our government.

---

i can see where you might be a bit confused. after decades of creeping socialism within the circles of government, it's difficult to tell where economy ends and government begins. the heart of both capitalism and conservative thought is that there is a definite line between economic considerations and the powers of government, a line that government should only cross when business inflicts damage on others. this is the same line that exists (or should exist) between government and the private lives of its citizens.

Quote:

---

if you believe our economy is egalitarian then you are sadly mistaken. there might be the false pretense of egalitarianism, but that's not the way it is.

---

no, our economy is far from egalitarian. the market was long ago infected by the disease of a spreading bureaucracy. instead of protecting citizens from the abuse of business, our government has decided to micromanage the affairs of business as a preventative measure to assure that abuses cannot take place. this has shown itself to do nothing more than place the ability to abuse in the very hands of those who have the most power to do so, the government itself. once again you have confused the concept of capitalism with the bastardized version practiced under the control of a corrupt bureaucracy.

as pure concept, capitalism places control of the means of production in the hands of the people themselves. how much more egalitarian can you get? with a government that is willing to stay within its roll of "protector of the rights of the people", enforcing those laws that keep us from being abused by the powerful, it is completely possible for such a concept to thrive and for all the people to prosper if they are willing to labor and take the needed risks. though failure is undoubtedly a part of that equation, it is also a necessary part of life.

Quote:

---

america is controlled by the large corporations. the large corporations are the ones the make the laws of our country. lobbying is legal vote buying.

---

now we come to the part of the sermon where we must ask, " where does the sin lie?" does the blame lie with a businessman who purchases a product freely offered or with the political animals who steal under the color of law the power of their constituents and package it for sale? the laws are enacted not by corporations, but by the very representatives you elected. you have placed men in power who are so corrupt that they can be easily swayed by a few pieces of silver.

Quote:

---

.....harassing people over rights which they have, that are "inalienable" is purely capitalistic. it might only be an underlying tone here, but it's there. where do you think the money comes from to pay the mayor of shreveport? why else would this be an issue?

---

though i'm sure that worthy mayor might well have been elected thanks to the funding of businesses seeking favor, his paycheck consists of taxes wrung from the citizens.

once again you seem to confuse the meaning of capitalism. consider the term "totalitarian" and you might be closer to the truth.

Quote:

---

.....it's only human nature to consolidate what power?

---

one should never confuse what is truly important with the pedestrian concerns of the marketplace. money is merely a representation of one form of power. the power to do and say what you please, the power to keep hold of your own possessions, the power to move freely and believe what you will; these are of far more import than materialistic wealth. no one seems to value these freedoms (after all, they're free. it's right there in the name.) until they are gone.

Quote:

---

.....the bottom line is that everything that happens in this country happens over money. so the very problem with the system is capitalism.

---

money, money, money, money. ya'll are so concerned with money. in this richest country on earth, where even the poor have a better life than all but the richest of many nations, all you can see are the dollars and cents. the fact that capitalism has enabled us to accumulate such wealth seems to have totally escaped you. all that most of you can see is what you don't have, but feel entitled to. do you honestly believe that greed is a monster created by capitalism alone?

i'm not a wealthy man and i'll probably work until the day i die, but i'd rather have freedom than baubles. i'd rather not be told by the all powerful state how far i may rise and how much i can accumulate. i'd rather have the freedom to fail than the mediocrity of an enforced comfortable poverty. a free market allows such a life. all else is slavery.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yokinazu

capitalism is not evil. socialism is not evil. no form of gov't in itself is evil.

---

this is not a matter of good and evil, but of which system is more prone to corruption. no corporation has an army and a police force (unless it is allowed such by a corrupt government), but these are the tools of the state. no business has the ability to enact law (unless it is allowed such by a corrupt government), but these arbitrary rules are how the state bends us to its will. no businessman has the power to send a man off to prison for the rest of his life (unless he is allowed such by a corrupt government), but this is the threat we live under if we refuse the whims of the state.

now tell me, which system has the greater capacity for evil.

Quote:

---

.....the reason i started this was because i heard that this mayor actually said screw the constitution, screw the second amendment.

---

i'm sure it was nothing more than a momentary lapse into honesty. the constitution is a document meant to protect the people from the abuses of government and the bureaucrats job is to gather power by any means from those below him. i'm sure you can see that it is in the best interests of such political animals to shred the constitution whenever possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Markass

actually the fourth is unreasonable search and seizure, you're thinking of the fifth which pretains to no self incrimination

---

Its applicable in both instances. The right to not incriminate one's self is akin to a search. One concerns property and the other is of the individual themselves. The Founders were wise enought to differentiate so as to not confuse the courts who now days cannot see the line of demarcation. Their overbearingness and obtuseness has blurred and distorted the original contexts!! :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gypski

Its applicable in both instances. The right to not incriminate one's self is akin to a search. One concerns property and the other is of the individual themselves. The Founders were wise enought to differentiate so as to not confuse the courts who now days cannot see the line of demarcation. Their overbearingness and obtuseness has blurred and distorted the original contexts!! :D

---

To clarify, you as a person are, in the true sense private property, no different then a piece of ground and so is what is on your person. And, as such, they can search your possessions with probable cause. The other concerns the individual and what is in your mind, the essence of the individual. It allows you to remain silent, and Maranda used to apply in both instances until its been shredded by the Reagun/Bush I SCOTUS appointments. :D

Dispicable! What is this nation coming to? We are supposed to be the land of the free. We are suppose to have constitutionally protected rights. How much longer before they take our privacy away from us, oh wait... they did that already. I'm telling you, they're watching, listening, and soon we won't have any rights left. Centainly not what our fore fathers had in mind. I'm just glad that my state still believes in the peoples' rights, don't think I'll ever leave.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slowspeed

Despicable! What is this nation coming to? We are supposed to be the land of the free. We are suppose to have constitutionally protected rights.

---

it would appear that our problems stem not from the protection of our rights, but from the definitions of those rights. government redefines our rights as individuals to support its agenda and we, in our greed, go along with the scapegoating of any group that does not include our avaricious little selves. instead of protecting the rights of the individual (one of government's foremost responsibilities), our representatives are interested only in furthering their own careers under the guise of promoting the dictatorship of the proletariat. hidden behind the pseudo-marxist rhetoric of an equitable distribution of wealth lies the true aim of our ruling class, the development of a totalitarian state where only those with political clout are allowed to rise to their true potential. all others are to be fitted into a socially acceptable mold, brought down to live in comfortable poverty while the fruits of their labors support an ever growing bureaucracy. we are numbed by the divisions of right and left, republican and democrat, liberal and conservative. we fight amongst ourselves for the scraps while political animals grow fat at our expense. they sell our freedom to the highest bidder and then hold out the buyers as the culprits. lulled by the lie of the ballot box, we fool ourselves into believing that the people have any say over the decisions of government. while we should be traveling a road toward ever more freedom, we forge our own chains and enslave ourselves to those we choose to serve us.

please excuse the soap box, but i have become more and more disillusioned of late. i look around and see a country built on the concepts of freedom becoming peopled with sheep and puling children. instead of striving to increase our freedoms, we willingly shackle ourselves and each other to the service of masters that we ourselves have created. we whine that we have not yet reached perfection, then take another step away from our goal. each time we restrict others for our own profit, we limit our own hopes to reach our full potential. if we hope to achieve success, we must be willing to endure failure and learn from it.

Well... in my country citizens arent even allowed to own firearms... and even if the pigs (aka cops) beat you (unlawfully of course) for whatever reason (or no reason at all) and you denounce them, the chances they get even a frown is very small... i hope knowing this be a consolation for you... :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by delusionsofNORMALity

it would appear that our problems stem not from the protection of our rights, but from the definitions of those rights. government redefines our rights as individuals to support its agenda and we, in our greed, go along with the scapegoating of any group that does not include our avaricious little selves. instead of protecting the rights of the individual (one of government's foremost responsibilities), our representatives are interested only in furthering their own careers under the guise of promoting the dictatorship of the proletariat. hidden behind the pseudo-marxist rhetoric of an equitable distribution of wealth lies the true aim of our ruling class, the development of a totalitarian state where only those with political clout are allowed to rise to their true potential. all others are to be fitted into a socially acceptable mold, brought down to live in comfortable poverty while the fruits of their labors support an ever growing bureaucracy. we are numbed by the divisions of right and left, republican and democrat, liberal and conservative. we fight amongst ourselves for the scraps while political animals grow fat at our expense. they sell our freedom to the highest bidder and then hold out the buyers as the culprits. lulled by the lie of the ballot box, we fool ourselves into believing that the people have any say over the decisions of government. while we should be traveling a road toward ever more freedom, we forge our own chains and enslave ourselves to those we choose to serve us.

please excuse the soap box, but i have become more and more disillusioned of late. i look around and see a country built on the concepts of freedom becoming peopled with sheep and puling children. instead of striving to increase our freedoms, we willingly shackle ourselves and each other to the service of masters that we ourselves have created. we whine that we have not yet reached perfection, then take another step away from our goal. each time we restrict others for our own profit, we limit our own hopes to reach our full potential. if we hope to achieve success, we must be willing to endure failure and learn from it.

---

US drug CZAR is just one person who makes policy for all. If he says it's bad bust them and screw your rights. As a matter of fact if you live in the US you have no rights except to bleed. Point, the cops and there are many different branches of law enforcement can and do on a regular basis usurp our rights just by saying ( I SMALL SOMETHING ) end of freedom.

Gun Confiscation is Beginning--Senate Bill SB-2099
HR45 Gun Owners Watch Out
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.

In November, our lying president promised he was not going after our
Second Amendment rights. This bill was introduced on Feb. 24. This bill
will become public knowledge 30 days after it is voted into law. This is
an amendment to the Internal Revenue Act of 1986. This means that the
Finance Committee can pass this without the Senate voting on it at all.
The full text of the proposed amendment is on the U.S. Senate homepage,
U.S. Senate <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.

Text of H.R.45 as Introduced in House: Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009 - U.S.... OpenCongress


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 yourSocial Security # -You will submit to a
physical & mental evaluation at any time of their choosing -Each
update change or ownership through private or public sale must be
reported and costs $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.

Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

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

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.

CALL YOUR SENATOR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by McDanger

Gun Confiscation is Beginning--Senate Bill SB-2099
HR45 Gun Owners Watch Out
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.

In November, our lying president promised he was not going after our
Second Amendment rights. This bill was introduced on Feb. 24. This bill
will become public knowledge 30 days after it is voted into law. This is
an amendment to the Internal Revenue Act of 1986. This means that the
Finance Committee can pass this without the Senate voting on it at all.
The full text of the proposed amendment is on the U.S. Senate homepage,
U.S. Senate <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.

Text of H.R.45 as Introduced in House: Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009 - U.S.... OpenCongress


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 yourSocial Security # -You will submit to a
physical & mental evaluation at any time of their choosing -Each
update change or ownership through private or public sale must be
reported and costs $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.

Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

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

H.R. 45: Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009 (GovTrack.us)

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.

CALL YOUR SENATOR

---

Do you have any information verifying this bill is even doing anything?? The status of the bill at thomas is "Latest Major Action: 2/9/2009 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. "

It is still in committee as far as I know. This is when a call to your Rep. does the most good.

i don't think it matters that if the bill is doing anything. if it doesn't make it out of committee it will be re-introduced with more BS in it to make the original naysayers sway their votes. the fact that something like this is even being talked about is ridiculous, disgusting and pathetic!


-shake

They can take that bill and wipe their ass with it. Bary Soetoro Aka Barak Obama can go shove his kenyan birthcertificate too, Or was it indonisian? Who the hell knows where this guy came from, probully outa a komono dragons ass.