Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: HR 45-- its real.

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Caldwell, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    418

    Post imported post


  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682

    Post imported post

    Yes, it is real, as in it exists.

    Have you looked at the number of sponsors? The movement it has had through committee?

    It exists, but it is going nowhere.

    Sit down. Take a few deep breaths. Maybe breathe into a paper bag for a while. Then have a sip of water.

    Everything is going to be OK.

    Tomorrow we'll check out those monster dust bunnies under the bed.

    stay safe.

    skidmark
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  3. #3
    Regular Member bigdaddy1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southsider der hey
    Posts
    1,320

    Post imported post

    Have to agree with Skid,

    This bill has been around for a few years now. No one is willing to co-sponser the ticket, and none of the lobbiest parites are willing to stand behind it.



    There are others floating around that have a better chance of sneaking through tied to other bills. Those are the ones you have to watch out fore.
    What part of "shall not be infringed" don't you understand?

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580

    Post imported post

    Yes, this bill is real. Do we need yet another thread about it? There are easily several dozen already.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hodgenville, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    1,261

    Post imported post

    Got a good friend who is as into guns as I am and he had a panic attack over this. I think I finally got him calm.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Caldwell, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    418

    Post imported post

    i am calm, i didnt do anything more then post it... so i think those who offer the advice may need to calm themselves just as much.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hodgenville, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    1,261

    Post imported post

    Not a thing wrongwith you posting it we need to be ever alert!

    Never give up alertness because of a pause on weather a post is right or wrong.

    Thank you for the post.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Caldwell, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    418

    Post imported post

    np

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Greendale, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    42

    Post imported post

    Here is a bill that was introduced around the same time as HR45, but this has 21 sponsors and it is in our best interest.

    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-17


    Member of:

    Wisconsin Carry, Inc
    National Rifle Association
    Gun Owners of America
    Knife Rights
    United States Conceal Carry Association

  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    We also need to stay after Congress NOT to ratify the Treaty Obama signed recently that would allow International law to userp our Constititional RTKBA.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580

    Post imported post

    Task Force 16 wrote:
    We also need to stay after Congress NOT to ratify the Treaty Obama signed recently that would allow International law to userp our Constititional RTKBA.
    Sounds like more FUD.
    Clinton signed CIFTA. Congress has not ratified it. Where is it legitimately reported that Obama signed any such treaty? He did mention it during the visit with the Mexican pres, but he hasn't signed it.. AFAIK.

    http://www.brutallyhonest.org/brutal...a-treaty-.html
    In recent meetings with Mexican President Felipe Calderon, Obama promised to urge the U.S. Senate to pass an international arms control treaty. The treaty, "Inter-American Convention Against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, and Other Related Materials" or CIFTA, was signed by President Bill Clinton ten years ago but it was never ratified by the Senate. The resurrection of this bill brings into question if this is another back door move to restrict second amendment rights by force in a treaty.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    166

    Post imported post

    dmworken wrote:
    Here is a bill that was introduced around the same time as HR45, but this has 21 sponsors and it is in our best interest.

    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-17

    ********! How can you say it's to our best interests? It declares that a person is not

    prohibited under THE BRADY HANDGUN VIOLENCE PROTECTION ACT......

    And that's in our best interest? We need to be interested in something else other

    than this.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580

    Post imported post

    marine77 wrote:
    dmworken wrote:
    Here is a bill that was introduced around the same time as HR45, but this has 21 sponsors and it is in our best interest.

    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-17

    Bull@#$%! How can you say it's to our best interests? It declares that a person is not

    prohibited under THE BRADY HANDGUN VIOLENCE PROTECTION ACT......

    And that's in our best interest? We need to be interested in something else other

    than this.
    I don't get why you do not desire this bill.

    HR17 ensures that those persons not prohibited cannot be prevented from purchasing a firearm for self-defense. What is wrong about that? It IS in our best interests. It disallows "gun-free cities" where handguns are prohibited for self-defense; such as DC. Don't you want to allow ALL Americans to exercise their 2nd Amendment Right for self-defense? :?
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    166

    Post imported post

    wrightme wrote:
    marine77 wrote:
    dmworken wrote:
    Here is a bill that was introduced around the same time as HR45, but this has 21 sponsors and it is in our best interest.

    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-17

    Bull@#$%! How can you say it's to our best interests? It declares that a person is not

    prohibited under THE BRADY HANDGUN VIOLENCE PROTECTION ACT......

    And that's in our best interest? We need to be interested in something else other

    than this.
    I don't get why you do not desire this bill.

    HR17 ensures that those persons not prohibited cannot be prevented from purchasing a firearm for self-defense. What is wrong about that? It IS in our best interests. It disallows "gun-free cities" where handguns are prohibited for self-defense; such as DC. Don't you want to allow ALL Americans to exercise their 2nd Amendment Right for self-defense? :?
    Since when did the brady bunch in their infinite wisdom give gun owners anything?

    Even if convicted of misdemeanors, according to them your not allowed to own fire-

    ams. Also look at the Hot Topics forum under Incorporation 101, i didn't know that

    until i looked at it, apparently the 2nd amendment means nothing to the states the

    way i read it. And i thank jpierce for bringing that to our attention.

  15. #15
    Regular Member Alexcabbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    2,290

    Post imported post

    Good grief. Notices about this dead letter are as common as Nigerian Scam spam mail. All knds of nutty stuff gets one or two sponsors and floats around Congress.

    Now, we should not be surprised that firearms owners scare the hell out of the bad guys. That is in the end why we keep and bear arms in the first place and furthermore is how it should be. Outside of course of the strict Fudders, who are IMO just wabbit-killing Vegans and just as much a contradiction in terms. (oh, wait. Didn't PETA mercy-kill a whole group of former pet bunnykins to put them out of the misery of being possible beloved well fed pets?), we keep weapons to defend ourselves and our rights from deadly threats coming from wherever.

    I will agree we need to keep an eye on these grifters. They are like weasels looking for a chink in the chicken wire. But the DemonRat leadership is not likely to allow this kind of garbage to advance while they are laying siege tunnels as fast as they can dig. They are currently looking to pass some kind of health care legislation that they envision will ultimately allow them to dictate the most intimate parts of everyone's life. As I have repeatedly warned, a very likely scenario would be , once they had at last taken over the health insurance industry or replaced it with total government control; to place an exorbitant tax (they will say "premium" in public but will argue "tax" to SCOTUS) on gun owners for reason of supposed increased risk of expensive injury by gunshot.

    Heck, for that matter how about rationing red meat, etc; as part of the same plan? And with "cap and tax", that hunting trip all the Fudds look forward to may have to be cancelled because they can't hire anyone to plant enough trees to justify emitting all the carbon burned to get out to where the game is.

    I am not saying this bill is no threat. The Ratz won't try and pass it (unless they think we are not watching) but they are not going to table (kill) it either. They hope we will watch this like hawks and thus they will be able to slip their further reaching and vile back-door stuff past right under our noses. Running around like Chicken Little squawking about a diversionary assault like this IMO leaves us vulnerable to a surprise attack on our flank. We have skirmishers watching this. We also have a superior force. We can only be defeaated through subterfuge on their part and spinelessness on our part.

    SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580

    Post imported post

    marine77 wrote:
    wrightme wrote:
    marine77 wrote:
    dmworken wrote:
    Here is a bill that was introduced around the same time as HR45, but this has 21 sponsors and it is in our best interest.

    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-17

    Bull@#$%! How can you say it's to our best interests? It declares that a person is not

    prohibited under THE BRADY HANDGUN VIOLENCE PROTECTION ACT......

    And that's in our best interest? We need to be interested in something else other

    than this.
    I don't get why you do not desire this bill.

    HR17 ensures that those persons not prohibited cannot be prevented from purchasing a firearm for self-defense. What is wrong about that? It IS in our best interests. It disallows "gun-free cities" where handguns are prohibited for self-defense; such as DC. Don't you want to allow ALL Americans to exercise their 2nd Amendment Right for self-defense? :?
    Since when did the brady bunch in their infinite wisdom give gun owners anything?

    Even if convicted of misdemeanors, according to them your not allowed to own fire-

    ams. Also look at the Hot Topics forum under Incorporation 101, i didn't know that

    until i looked at it, apparently the 2nd amendment means nothing to the states the

    way i read it. And i thank jpierce for bringing that to our attention.
    WHERE, are the brady bunch "giving gun owners anything?"

    It isn't Brady. It is about PREVENTING bans beyond Brady, or don't you get it?
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  17. #17
    Regular Member Alexcabbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    2,290

    Post imported post

    It is quite disturbing that if you and your wife/husband/boyfreind/girlfriend get into an arguement and it gets loud, in many cases the police can chaarge one or both with domestic violence and, though it be a misdemeanor, prohibit one or both parties from ever again possessing firearms ON A MISDEMEANOR CHARGE. This is one of the reasons that since that law passed, I have avoided getting myself into any "signifigant other" relationships. The other reason is I am ugly.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    166

    Post imported post

    wrightme wrote:
    marine77 wrote:
    wrightme wrote:
    marine77 wrote:
    dmworken wrote:
    Here is a bill that was introduced around the same time as HR45, but this has 21 sponsors and it is in our best interest.

    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-17

    Bull@#$%! How can you say it's to our best interests? It declares that a person is not

    prohibited under THE BRADY HANDGUN VIOLENCE PROTECTION ACT......

    And that's in our best interest? We need to be interested in something else other

    than this.
    I don't get why you do not desire this bill.

    HR17 ensures that those persons not prohibited cannot be prevented from purchasing a firearm for self-defense. What is wrong about that? It IS in our best interests. It disallows "gun-free cities" where handguns are prohibited for self-defense; such as DC. Don't you want to allow ALL Americans to exercise their 2nd Amendment Right for self-defense? :?
    Since when did the brady bunch in their infinite wisdom give gun owners anything?

    Even if convicted of misdemeanors, according to them your not allowed to own fire-

    ams. Also look at the Hot Topics forum under Incorporation 101, i didn't know that

    until i looked at it, apparently the 2nd amendment means nothing to the states the

    way i read it. And i thank jpierce for bringing that to our attention.
    WHERE, are the brady bunch "giving gun owners anything?"

    It isn't Brady. It is about PREVENTING bans beyond Brady, or don't you get it?
    But it already starts with a brady ban and that's enough of an exception. It's just my

    $.02 worth, and just my opinion. You may like this bill, more power to you. Just in my

    opinion, not worth the paper it's printed on.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580

    Post imported post

    marine77 wrote:
    wrightme wrote:
    .
    WHERE, are the brady bunch "giving gun owners anything?"

    It isn't Brady. It is about PREVENTING bans beyond Brady, or don't you get it?
    But it already starts with a brady ban and that's enough of an exception. It's just my

    $.02 worth, and just my opinion. You may like this bill, more power to you. Just in my

    opinion, not worth the paper it's printed on.
    How so? It aims to prevent further infringements, thus is worthy of support. Do you prefer that infringements are allowed, preventing purchase for self-defense?
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  20. #20
    Regular Member crazydude6030's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Fairfax, va
    Posts
    512

    Post imported post

    It isn't hard to figure out why this stuff keeps coming up. I get a e-mail about twice a day with something along the lines of how my freedom is being attacked.:?

    The latest one is this little print. Check the date on the article Sept 30 2009.

    http://www.personalliberty.com/freed...ership-rights/

    It doesn't mean we don't need to watch this stuff but seeing it as often as I do just seems more like fear mongering more then anything.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Posts
    1,558

    Post imported post

    It is a silent bomb just waiting for the right time for it to go off. Those that say it is no threat are completely fooling themselves and others. Everything is done for a reason, when this or other quiet bills are passed it will split the country and possible set the stage for the next war that divides this country.
    -I come in peace, I didn't bring artillery. But I am pleading with you with tears in my eyes: If you screw with me, I'll kill you all.
    -Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.
    Marine General James Mattis,

  22. #22
    Regular Member Alexcabbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    2,290

    Post imported post

    Like I said, we all have to watch these weasels, but they have made the mistake of exposing all the phony tricks they use by using those tricks in the course of trying to ram through legislation that almost everyone is watchng closely. The whole nation is getting a lesson in how a bill REALLY becomes law, and The People are rapidly wising up. If all else fails they will probably push through a bill adding another 5 years to the penalty for posessing kiddie porn, slap the health-care stuff (and maybe anti-gun) stuff onto it at the last second and denounce anyone who declines to vote "Yea" to the entire package as a friend of child molestors.

    The whole process is like watching several hundred WC Fields clones trying to scam the entire American public. However, Fields' cardinal rule was: Never smarten up a chump. But by resorting to these types of tricks while the whole country is watching, they are educating those of us who thought things got done by simple majority voting.

    We need to keep a sharp lookout, eternal vigilance is the price and all that. But what is about to happen to these Ratz is analogous to what happens to a hand-loader who puts a quadruple magnum powder charge into a .38 Special cartridge and sets it off in a cheap revolver. Remember to duck.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •