Kill (the) bill

January 14, 9:29 AMGun Rights ExaminerDavid Codrea

Previous Next

46 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Gun Rights Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

Congressman Bobby L. Rush

Yesterday, we talked about a federal gun licensing bill introduced in Congress by Rep. Bobby L. Rush (D-IL). Today, we're going to break down what it purports to do and how it proposes to do it.

The bill is H.R. 45. Here's what it says it will do:

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.

"Certain firearms"?

‘‘(36) The term ‘qualifying firearm’—
‘(A) means—
‘‘(i) any handgun; or
‘‘(ii) any semiautomatic firearm that can accept any detachable ammunition feeding device;

And here's where we start to get a glimpse of the "other purposes":

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...

"To possess"?

"Applicable date"?

‘‘(A) with respect to a qualifying firearm that is acquired by the person before the date of the enactment of Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009, 2 years after such date of enactment; and

‘‘(B) with respect to a qualifying firearm that is acquired by the person on or after the date of the enactment of Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009, 3 year after such date of enactment.’’

Does that mean what I think it does? The stated purpose was limited in scope to "licensing for purchasers," but the fine print includes guns currently owned?

I guess if you're not going to let a little thing like "shall not be infringed" bother you, why would Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution's proscription that "No... ex post facto Law shall be passed" slow you down?

So what hoops will our masters make us jump through to win their conditional permission?

We have to submit an application to the attorney general, probably anti-gun Eric Holder unless our "leaders" man up, do the right thing and block his confirmation. That supp...uh...application must include:

• a passport photo
• identifying information
• a thumbprint  a statement that we're not prohibited persons--did I mention actual prohibited persons can't be required to give that information? It violates their Fifth Amendment-protected right against self-incrimination.
• certification that firearms will be"safely stored"--that is, useless for your defense, but quite advantageous to pitchfork murderers.
• certification that a written exam was passed, to include "any...subjects...the Attorney General determines to be appropriate"--think of it as a poll test.
• an authorization for the feds to access your medical/mental health records
• and, oh yeah, a fee--think of it as a poll tax.

In my next column, we're going to look at the likely effect this bill will have on it's stated purposes, as well as the impact it would have had on the crime that inspired its title .

------------

Tomorrow's the day

Have you contacted the Senate Judiciary Committee yet to oppose Eric Holder's confirmation as attorney general? Their hearing is tomorrow, so there is still time. This link has all their contact information, including their email addresses. Please do it right now.

 UPDATE:

WorldNetDaily cites yesterday's Gun Rights Examiner column in today's headline story.