Hr 45

Calabrio

Dedicated LVC Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2005
Messages
8,793
Reaction score
3
Location
Sarasota
Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009

To provide for the implementation of a system of licensing for purchasers of certain firearms and for a record of sale system for those firearms, and for other purposes.


1/6/2009--Introduced.
Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009 - Amends the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act to 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 and such license has not been invalidated or revoked. Prescribes license application, issuance, and renewal requirements.

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. Prescribes firearms transfer reporting and record keeping requirements. Directs the Attorney General to establish and maintain a federal record of sale system.

Prohibits:
(1) 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) a licensed manufacturer or dealer from failing to comply with reporting and record keeping requirements of this Act;
(3) failing to report the loss or theft of the firearm to the Attorney General within 72 hours;
(4) failing to report to the Attorney General an address change within 60 days;
(5) 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.
Prescribes criminal penalties for violations of firearms provisions covered by this Act.
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.
Authorizes the Attorney General to certify state firearm licensing or record of sale systems.
 
WND Exclusive WEAPONS OF CHOICE
Big Brother's new target: Tracking of all firearms
'This is nothing less than a declaration of war on American gun owners'
Posted: January 13, 2009
10:08 pm Eastern

By Drew Zahn
© 2009 WorldNetDaily



U.S. Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Ill., is hoping to pass a firearm-licensing bill that will significantly rewrite gun-ownership laws in America.

Among the more controversial provisions of the bill are requirements that all handgun owners submit to the federal government a photo, thumb print and mental heath records. Further, the bill would order the attorney general to establish a database of every handgun sale, transfer and owner's address in America.

The bill claims its purpose is "to protect the public against the unreasonable risk of injury and death associated with the unrecorded sale or transfer of firearms to criminals and youth."

"This is nothing less than a declaration of war on American gun owners," Codrea writes on Gun Rights Examiner.

Rush's proposed bill, H.R. 45, is alternatively known as "Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009," named after an Illinois teenager killed by a gunshot.

According the bill's text, "On the afternoon of May 10, 2007, Blair Holt, a junior at Julian High School in Chicago, was killed on a public bus riding home from school when he used his body to shield a girl who was in the line of fire after a young man boarded the bus and started shooting."

The bill then argues that interstate firearm trafficking and children dying from gun violence create legitimate cause for the federal government to monitor gun ownership and transfers in new ways.

If passed, the bill would make it illegal to own or possess a "qualifying firearm" – defined as any handgun or any semiautomatic firearm that takes an ammunition clip – without a "Blair Holt" license.

To obtain a "Blair Holt" license, an application must be made that includes a photo, address, all previous aliases, thumb print, completion of a written firearm safety test, release of mental health records to the attorney general and a fee not to exceed $25.

Further, the bill makes it illegal to transfer ownership of a qualifying firearm to anyone who is not a licensed gun dealer or collector. Exceptions to this rule include transfer to family members by gift or bequest and loans, not to exceed 30 days, of a firearm for lawful purposes "between persons who are personally known to each other."

The bill also requires qualifying firearm owners to report all transfers to the attorney general's database. It would also be illegal for a licensed gun owner to fail to record a gun loss or theft within 72 hours or fail to report a change of address within 60 days.

And if a minor obtains a weapon and injures someone with it, the owner of the gun – if deemed to have failed to meet certain safety requirements – faces a multiple-year jail sentence.

H.R. 45 is a resurfacing of 2007's H.R. 2666, which contained much of the same language and was co-sponsored by 15 other representatives and Barack Obama's current chief of staff, Rahm Emmanuel. H.R. 2666 was assigned to the House Judiciary committee, where no action was taken.

H.R. 45 currently has no co-sponsors and is likewise assigned to the House Judiciary committee.
 
what is the likeliehood of this actually getting passed? my god did i go to sleep and wake up in germany?
 
If passed, the bill would make it illegal to own or possess a "qualifying firearm" – defined as any handgun or any semiautomatic firearm that takes an ammunition clip – without a "Blair Holt" license.
I hope they word it that way. the effing MORONS. I will have no problem then.

All of my guns take magazines, not clips.
 
I suppose I am going to open up a hornet's nest but I don't see a problem with this bill as it is written.
For legal gun ownership, it requires you to varify those thing necessary to insure that the weapons you have are obtained ,and kept legally.
I don't think it will ease the availability of criminals to get weapons but, it will make tracking weapons a bit more fruitful.
I compare it to states like California that have strict air polution standards for vehicles.
Sure, you own the vehicle but, laws require that you not only keep the vehicle as anti polluting as possible but, also a record of state required test are kept in the data files of the DMV.
I really don't understand why legal gun owners would be worried about this bill.
The requirements stated in the bill DO protect lives and after all, isn't that the bottom line here?
Big deal, if it passes, you will see more control in specifics regarding ownership of a weapon but it does not say you can't own a gun, just that measures will be put in place to track gun ownership in the hope that less of them will fall into the wrong hands.
Bob.
 
" Ideas are more powerful than guns, we would not let them have guns,
why should we let them have ideas,"
Joseph Stalin

Grow up BOB
 
Bob,
What's the purpose of a gun law that won't prevent criminal access to fire arm, but only makes it more difficult for law abiding citizens to do so? What do you think the purpose of the law is.

If it doesn't accomplish anything, then you should oppose it because it's needless, government expansion. But do you really think that there no agenda there? That this is a something being proposed in isolation.
 
I know thee is an agenda behind this. Its another way for the govt to take our money. I can guarantee these "licenses" wont be free.

I have a concealed carry permit from NC, which is good in my home state of WV, along with many other states that I am required to travel through. However, now that I am stationed in communist California, I am not allowed to carry a gun. Yes I can own one, I'm just not allowed to take it anywhere.

I can apply for a CCW permit here in CA, but its $100 non refundable, and I have to have a "good reason" for wanting a permit. And according to the website for san bernadino county, "Personal protection isn't a good enough reason". What kind of :q:q:q:q is that? Are you effing kidding me? If you work at a business and have to carry large deposits to the bank then thats ok, but if you just want to protect your own money, or just your family, thats not a good enough reason. WTF kind of bull:q:q:q:q is that? I :q:q:q:qing hate this state. I dont see why anyone would choose to live here with all the damn communist bull:q:q:q:q that goes on here.

The only good thig this state has done recently was outlaw gay marriges, and then all the f a gs protested and vandalized peoples houses who supported proposition 8. Probably a good thing I wasnt carrying my gun, might have been some dead homos.

Sorry but I get a little worked up over this subject.

END RANT
 
I suppose I am going to open up a hornet's nest but I don't see a problem with this bill as it is written.
For legal gun ownership, it requires you to varify those thing necessary to insure that the weapons you have are obtained ,and kept legally.
I don't think it will ease the availability of criminals to get weapons but, it will make tracking weapons a bit more fruitful.
I compare it to states like California that have strict air polution standards for vehicles.
Sure, you own the vehicle but, laws require that you not only keep the vehicle as anti polluting as possible but, also a record of state required test are kept in the data files of the DMV.
I really don't understand why legal gun owners would be worried about this bill.
The requirements stated in the bill DO protect lives and after all, isn't that the bottom line here?
Big deal, if it passes, you will see more control in specifics regarding ownership of a weapon but it does not say you can't own a gun, just that measures will be put in place to track gun ownership in the hope that less of them will fall into the wrong hands.
Bob.
Bob, you're completely ignorant about gun laws. They don't protect lives, they endanger them. They open up the door to confiscation, and only law abiding citizens will obey them. Criminals will not. Thus, only criminals will have guns at the endgame.

There are already 20,000 gun laws on the books, Bob. Why do we need more? Why should I, a private citizen, have to beseech the federal government for permission to buy a gun when it's enumerated in the Bill of Rights that I can own and even carry one?

More gun laws always lead to more gun laws. You think that the government will be satisfied with just these laws? The left has been passing gun laws since 1934, and it never ends.

Do some research on how many crimes the Brady Law prevented.

Interesting that you compare guns to cars, as if there's any comparison. Cars don't get confiscated, guns do. Cars kill more people than guns do.
 
Eh, I have my guns and the necessary permits. Maybe I'm crazy, but I'm going to choose not to get worked up over some other piece of legislation passes or not. The end result is, I know the day will never come when they show up at my door to take my guns. Or, if it does, I would have long ago moved overseas. Either way, I have better things to worry about and, frankly, many of you should too.
 
Eh, I have my guns and the necessary permits. Maybe I'm crazy, but I'm going to choose not to get worked up over some other piece of legislation passes or not. The end result is, I know the day will never come when they show up at my door to take my guns. Or, if it does, I would have long ago moved overseas. Either way, I have better things to worry about and, frankly, many of you should too.

That's an apathetic attitude that will only lead to further erosion of your rights and the fundamental values the country was founded on.

And while they may never go door to door to collect your firearms, maybe you'll be grandfathered in. But will successive generations even have the right or ability to have one?
 
Eh, I have my guns and the necessary permits. Maybe I'm crazy, but I'm going to choose not to get worked up over some other piece of legislation passes or not. The end result is, I know the day will never come when they show up at my door to take my guns. Or, if it does, I would have long ago moved overseas. Either way, I have better things to worry about and, frankly, many of you should too.
Eventually they'll get around to something you really care about.

So, which country would you move all your guns to?
 
Just an FYI to you people like Bob who don't understand what's going on:

With the proposal of HR 45 in the House of Representatives, written by Black Panther Bobby Rush, who served a sentence for firearms violations, the attack on the Second Amendment has begun.

HR 45 would required a National Biometric I.D. to possess a firearm and National Registry of all firearms. HR 45 would require all gun owners to have their medical records placed in a National Database and would endanger ANY gun owner from possessing a firearm if they had EVER suffered a traumatic experience that could possibly lead to PTSD.

This bill would also require ALL gunowners to surrender their 4th Amendment and 5th Amendment rights because it would allow enforcing agents to search and seize a gun owner’s residence or vehicle, at ANY TIME, without announcement or search warrant and would cause gunowners to surrender possible incriminatinating evidence, i.e. medical records, that would prohibit them from possessing a firearm and could lead to the manditory fines and imprisonment imposed in HR 45.

In all, HR 45 would violate the Full Faith and Credit Clause, the Commerce Clause, the First, Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Ninth and Tenth Amendments and is probably the MOST Unconsitutional Bill in U.S. History.

(h/t nelsonknows from HotAir)
 
So, Foss, I didn't think you needed my help here - it looked like pro 2nd was holding up just fine...

It is in subcommittee... These are the members of the subcommittee... If they are your reps - talk to them, otherwise write to the first name on the list - the chair...

* David Scott (Va.), Chairman
* Pedro Pierluisi (P.R.)
* Jerrold Nadler (N.Y.)
* Zoe Lofgren (Calif.)
* Sheila Jackson-Lee (Texas)
* Maxine Waters (Calif.)
* Steve Cohen (Tenn.)
* Anthony D. Weiner (N.Y.)
* Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Fla.)
* Randy Forbes (Va.), Ranking Member
* Louie Gohmert (Texas)
* James Sensenbrenner (Wis.)
* Howard Coble (N.C.)
* Steve Chabot (Ohio)
* Dan Lungren (Calif.)

This type of bill has been introduced quite a few times since Clinton's act was removed... Each time it has gone down in defeat - So, make sure your rep knows your feelings about this...
 
So, Foss, I didn't think you needed my help here - it looked like pro 2nd was holding up just fine...

It is in subcommittee... These are the members of the subcommittee... If they are your reps - talk to them, otherwise write to the first name on the list - the chair...

* David Scott (Va.), Chairman
* Pedro Pierluisi (P.R.)
* Jerrold Nadler (N.Y.)
* Zoe Lofgren (Calif.)
* Sheila Jackson-Lee (Texas)
* Maxine Waters (Calif.)
* Steve Cohen (Tenn.)
* Anthony D. Weiner (N.Y.)
* Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Fla.)
* Randy Forbes (Va.), Ranking Member
* Louie Gohmert (Texas)
* James Sensenbrenner (Wis.)
* Howard Coble (N.C.)
* Steve Chabot (Ohio)
* Dan Lungren (Calif.)
A veritable Who's Who of rabid gun-hating zealots.
 

Members online

Back
Top