"Blair's Bill" - National registry/licensing

Status
Not open for further replies.
How about instead of showing them a national gun ID card, I just show them my middle finger. The extended digit is straight and representative of a gun barrel. It means that I own a firearm. Anyone who gives a similar sign to a national firearms registry is signaling to the authorities that they too are in possession of a firearm. I think message will be clear to all authorities.
Click to expand...

Awesome. The theme music from Braveheart was in my head after the first sentence.
 
"Rush was an active participant in the unprecedented Civil Rights Movement of the 1960's. In an effort to secure basic civil and human rights for African-Americans, women and others, he was a member of the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SIMCC) from 1966 to 1968 and a co-founder of the Illinois Black Panther Party in 1968." - from his site
 
If they want to register guns similarly to cars, fine. Then you have to have a license and get your sidearm registered with the state, so you can legally carry that anywhere and everywhere.

Firearms which do not leave your home or the range, loaded, are not subject to this. Just like you don't have to register or insure a car you have sitting in your garage, you would not have to register all the guns in your closet. Just the one you carry on your side from day to day.

I got no problem with that. :D
 
So who wants to guess what Mccarthy, Bloomberg or most of the 08 prez frontrunners woluld do with a nationwide list of gun owners, seems like a good way to sidestep the tidehart ammendment, 2nd ammendment, and founding principles in general. Bloomberg has tried to sue, mccarthy has tried to legislate, and Marylands own dissapointment McCulski has tried to withold funding, all to accomplish their goal of a gun free Utopia, they will not give up, neither can we. It is much much easier to write, call, vote, show up at hearings and organize now than it will be to hide from or fight the goons they send our way when we give em the finger.
 
Why gather information about the law-abiding who will continue, we can expect, abide with the law?

What gain is there in this?

There is no gain I can see, so there can only be a loss to come, in some way.

Government has to reprioritize on what its important and proper functions are. Increasing surveillance of the law-abiding isn't one of them.
 
Two words: massive non-compliance
Click to expand...
You missed a word: simultaneous. They're happy to prosecute a few so long as only a few cross the line at a time; we're not all willing to cross that line all at once.

I think it'd be great. Did you know you can own a car without a driver's license? You can also drive one on private property without any registration. ... I haven't thought it all out, so I'm sure there's a few things I'm missing. There's a bunch of crap in there that'd we'd need to go through, possibly a few things we wouldn't want. I think it might be worth looking into though.
Click to expand...
What you're considering is NOT new/novel/interesting. The "treat 'em like cars" idea has been thoroughly considered, and found desperately wanting.

The primary disconnect in the analogy is:
1. You use a car on public property, but (generally speaking) you do not use a gun on public property ... and when you do "use" it (for defense), the state has no business in beating you up because you didn't do some paperwork to protect your life.
2. "...shall not be infringed". Licensing does nothing useful, precisely because it only addresses those people who are demonstrably not the problem, and should/shall not be burdened with preemptively proving their innocence.

Realize too that many states have requirements far less than the car-licensing-style paperwork you're considering. Completely unlicensed purchase & open carry of guns is perfectly legal in much of the country; we're not going to put up with a national carry requirement precisely because it will invariably be much worse than anything we have in VT, AK, AZ, NH, GA, etc.

Consider the car-licensing analogy for your own edification, but realize that it was considered long ago and discounted as absolutely not what we want nationally. You're far better off getting the "individual RKBA" ruling in the DC Parker case incorporated to the states via the 14th (?) amendment, and getting the 922(o) machinegun ban overturned, and getting the "full faith and credit" clause applied to compel interstate recognition of state licenses.
 
The car analogy in my opinion is a waste anyways if you look at how many people are cited for speeding, DUI and other violations! And a lot of those people have licenses to drive a car, having a license does not make you any safer or less safe.
 
Rush is posturing and using this man's grief over his dead son as a political tool. It's really despicable, but not unexpected.

Even the reports on the news here in Chicago are all including a closing line after they report Bobbie Rush's new gun control proposals reminding everyone that "... of course, guns are already banned in Chicago".

The short version is that Rush needs Daley's Democrat machine support in the next round of elections. With Jessie Jackson Jr. wielding more political clout, now that his wife is on Daley's city council, Rush wants to be sure he keeps his seat at the big kids table.

Anyone with a half a brain (the average Cook County voter for instance) has to understand that what they are doing is trying once again to make something even more illegal than it already is.

Funny how Bobbie Rush thought gun ownership as a great idea back in 1968 when his buddies Fred Hampton and a bunch of other Black Panther's were killed in their sleep by a Chicago Police raid. The cops rationale was that they were holding an "arsenal" at the time. I guess he's "evolved" in his positions.

This proposal is going nowhere and is NOT a good platform for amendments we might all like. There' isn't a single congress critter I'd trust not to vote for it, as is.

At this point, with the Dem's in congress looking more and more ineffective to their fringe base, Pelosi and company would jump with both feet on a bill like this that they could wave to their far left supporters to prove they could get something "important" done.

Two years ago the ISRA tried to reach a "reasonable compromise" with the state level pinheads on limiting some types of rifles in return for the destruction of purchase records the governor had the state police holding.

Once it was passed he did a line item veto and screwed the gun owners of Illinois. He still has the records of every gun purchased in the state.

There is no room for "reasonable compromise" anymore with anyone.
 
Firearms which do not leave your home or the range, loaded, are not subject to this. Just like you don't have to register or insure a car you have sitting in your garage, you would not have to register all the guns in your closet. Just the one you carry on your side from day to day.

I got no problem with that.
Click to expand...

And when they use the registration list for confiscation, what then? Are they not going to confiscate unregistered firearms - just the ones you've got registered? And that's accepting with blind faith that they won't expand the definition of what needs to be registered.

Why gather information about the law-abiding who will continue, we can expect, abide with the law?

What gain is there in this?
Click to expand...

Qui bono? Well, obviously it's the government - they get more power out of the deal, and therefore are more able to make whichever law they want down the line.
 
http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/il01_rush/blairsbill.html

Congressman Rush introduces gun legislation named after Blair Holt, the Julian High School hero

Chicago, IL. ---- U.S. Rep. Rush was joined by Ronald Holt, the father of Blair Holt, Rufus Williams, president of the Chicago Board of Education, law enforcement officials and community activists to introduce Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2007-HR 2666 (Blair’s Bill) aimed at curbing senseless violence by implementing a uniform system for purchasers of certain firearms.

The group gathered at the location where Holt’s son Blair, was elevated from being an honor student attending Julian High School to a hero when he used his body to shield a ultimately save a female friend.

“The proliferation of guns in our community impacts us all. My son lost his life back in 1999 due to senseless gun violence and my nephew sits in jail today, convicted of fatally shooting someone. Like all of you, I am sick and tired of scenes like this being replayed over and over again in our neighborhoods," said Rep. Rush, chairman of the Energy and Commerce subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection.

"Since the beginning of this school year alone, over 31 children have lost their life by violence, and the great majority were killed with guns. In response to these tragedies, I am introducing a bill in Congress that would regulate gun trafficking and possession in this country. HR 2666, Blair’s Bill, will implement a nationwide program of licensing all individuals who possess firearms and require all guns to be registered in a national gun registry," he added.

According to police, Michael Pace boarded an eastbound 103rd Street CTA bus at 103rd and Halsted about 3:20 p.m. on May 10 and started shooting, striking two males and three females, all of whom were students at Julian. Kevin Jones is accused of giving Pace the gun, knowing he wanted to use it to try to kill someone he had argued with. Julian High School student Blair Holt used his body to shield and ultimately save a female friend.

The purpose of the Bill is:
(1) to protect the public against the unreasonable risk of injury and death associated with the unrecorded sale or transfer of qualifying firearms to criminals and youth;
(2) to ensure that owners of qualifying firearms are knowledgeable in the safe use, handling, and storage of those firearms;
(3) to restrict the availability of qualifying firearms to criminals, youth, and other persons prohibited by Federal law from receiving firearms; and
(4) to facilitate the tracing of qualifying firearms used in crime by Federal and State law enforcement agencies.
Click to expand...

HR 2666. Bill text isn't in thomas.loc.gov yet though..
 
Gifted: NO NO NO NO NO! I'm sorry, but you've got it wrong on so many levels. First, car ownership and the ability to acquire a driver's license isn't a right. And you can very easily buy and drive a car on public roads without a license (just don't get caught - not that hard to do in much of the country). And, realistically, the federal government will not make it easy to do anything - is it generally hastle-free to deal with the government at any capacity, in your opinion?
Click to expand...
In most states being able to carry a weapons isn't a right. And people carry concealed without licenses all the time. Not terribly important, since most people have already pointed the main fallacies of the idea, not that it's not fun to think about.
 
THR Law experts: The chances of this one going through are slim arent they?

This law of course, is in itself against the current law. I doubt he knows or cares.
 
If a law such as this passes, it'll be prohibition all over again.

I wonder who the next Al Capone will be?
 
During the last prohibition my family were moonshiners, maybe during the next I can be a "Gunshiner."

Jefferson
 
A little background on Bobbie Rush.

In addition to being one of the original Black Panthers that walked around downtown Chicago armed, his personal track record leaves a bit to be desired.

His son was shot and killed in a gang related shootout on the street and one of his nephews is in prison for life for shooting and killing another gang member.

I guess his first move, if he really wants to control guns, would be to take them away from all of his family members.
 
Funny how Bobbie Rush thought gun ownership as a great idea back in 1968 when his buddies Fred Hampton and a bunch of other Black Panther's were killed in their sleep by a Chicago Police raid. The cops rationale was that they were holding an "arsenal" at the time. I guess he's "evolved" in his positions.
Click to expand...

I'll say. :barf:
 
National registry?

There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. When there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.
Ayn Rand


Evil requires the sanction of the victim.
Ayn Rand
 
Just like you don't have to register or insure a car you have sitting in your garage, you would not have to register all the guns in your closet. Just the one you carry on your side from day to day. I got no problem with that.
Click to expand...
I do have an unregistered car sitting in my garage. Thanks to stupid licensing laws, I can't even take it for a short spin around the block occasionally to make sure everything is still lubed & functioning properly; instead, I'm legally obligated to let it sit and rot there. What's the difference between that vehicle and my licensed ones? Answer: lack of a single small metal plate with numbers on it. What good does that do? Answer: nothing. Frankly, methinks the Founding Fathers would be appalled at the notion of registering vehicles & drivers; why yes I do believe there is a right to unrestricted* vehicular travel, that it is covered by the 9th/10th Amendments, and that licensing vehicles & drivers is a perfect example of why registering guns is stupid. Here in GA, there are only two reasons why vehicles are registered:
1. Taxation.
2. In a very few counties, emissions checks.
That's it. Now kindly explain why vehicle licensing exists.

Next...
I don't know what state you live it. I live in GA. I do not have to register with the state ANY guns in my closet, including the ones I carry on my side from day to day. The only licensing involved is the action of carrying any gun on my side ... which is silly, because the only people who get that license are exactly the ones who shouldn't have to put up with such "guilty until proven innocent" crap.

Finally...
I DO have a problem with that. It all presumes I'm guilty of something, and I have to jump thru hoops and pay fees just to prove I'm innocent and should be allowed to harmlessly exercise my rights. I have yet to see ANY explanation of why licensing weapons - or cars for that matter - is useful to any degree beyond enhancing governmental oppressive powers and revenue enhancement.

Remember the 4th Amendment: to wit "the people shall be secure in their papers". That means the government better have a darn good reason, demonstrable to a judge, to access ANY of your papers. I believe that precludes licensing of anything, as such compels people to reveal personal information - most of which is irrelevant to the act/item being licensed - to engage in harmless exercise of natural rights. Let me expand that last point: licensing requires you to get permission to harmlessly exercise a right; dangerous actions are still forbidden ... so what's the point of licensing driving or weapons possession? esp. as it never seems to do any particular good...

To put it simply:
What good does licensing do? Seriously? Nothing!
Those who subject themselves to licensing would be no more a problem if they were not licensed.

* - Like other rights, the only restrictions allowed on driving should be adjudicated in court against a specific person for specific reasons.
 
FOPA itself is a horribly unconstitutional law. IT violates states rights.
Click to expand...

My point in bringing it up is, the congressman is so ignorant of the law, that he is introducing a bill he knows wont go anywhere to pay lip service. Pretty rotten that he is related to the killer, and this is his way of 'helping the victims family' by introducing a law that wouldn't have prevented squat.

As far as FOPA goes, I like the peaceable journey part - imagine if you had to get a 'permit' to bring a gun in the state for 3 hours while you drive through it like you do in Mass.
 
Well the Peacable journey part infringes upon the states rights. It is the same argument used against the national reciprocity bill.
Click to expand...

Well arent you a regular Jefferson Davis...:D Yeah, youre right it is, but you have to admit - imagine how much it would suck to get 9 or 10 permits if you had to do a cross country move.

And those state rights youre speaking of, infringe upon the 2A, thus IMO making them null and void.
 
Well the Peacable journey part infringes upon the states rights.
Click to expand...

If you believe that RKBA is recognized by the 2nd Amendment, then the states waived interrupting "Safe Passage" when they signed up to be part of these United States.

It is the same argument used against the national reciprocity bill.
Click to expand...

Which shouldn't BE necessary - "Full Faith and Credit." Off the top of my head, it works for state DL, state ID, marriage license, divorce court proceedings, adoption/birth, incorporation...doesn't apply for lawyers, doctors, boxers or CCW for some reason.

I don't need to register my car in other states to drive through them, nor do I need to re-marry every time I cross a state border for the first time. Neither car plates nor marriage is in the Constitution, which then delegates the power to the states to regulate such - therefore both examples interfere with "states rights" too...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
  • Locked
Blair Resigns
Replies
9
Views
654
Art Eatman
A
J
  • Locked
HR 34: Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2013
Replies
2
Views
642
Buck Kramer
B
S
  • Locked
Gun registry identified as a model of incompetence
Replies
5
Views
650
Atticus
A
R
  • Locked
Canada - Martin targets gun registry
Replies
2
Views
369
SDC
S
C
  • Locked
Canada" Cauchon pins registry cost on honest mistakes"
Replies
4
Views
495
moa
M
Back
Top