Legislation, Registration, Confiscation

More "feel good" legislation.

What part of "the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." do these idiots not understand? Congressman Rush only has to look to Canada for an example of how well a national gun registry would work. *sigh*

-Yuri

Illinois congressman introduces 'Blair's Bill'

By Sarah Schulte

An Illinois lawmaker is proposing a law he hopes will stop the violence that takes the lives of young people.

The legislation is called "Blair's Bill," named after Julian High School Student Blair Holt. He died after using his body to shield and save the life of a female friend during a shooting on a CTA bus.

It was exactly one month ago when Blair Holt was killed at 103rd Street and Halsted. Sunday, Blair's father Ronald Holt, who is a police officer, stood with Congressman Bobby Rush and other community leaders to talk about the bill.

Contrell Pettis was Blair's friend and was riding the bus with Holt when two teens opened fire one May afternoon, killing Holt and injuring four other students of Julian High School. He stood with the others Sunday but did not want to speak publicly.

"He [Pettis] suffered a gunshot to his funnybone, and he is just now getting sensation about," said Ronald Holt.

After his son's death, Ronald Holt and his family pondered how to save others from gun violence.

"We came together and talked about what can we do lawfully to get the guns off the streets and to keep control of the guns that do make it to the streets so they don't get into the wrong hands," Ronald Holt said.

Congressman Rush, who lost his own son to gun violence, says the proposed licensing program is similar to way get licenses are given to drivers. Guns would be part of national registry.

"Blair's Bill will implement an nationwide program of licensing," Rush said. "Blair's Bill will assist law enforcement in tracking the flow of guns and require those who possess them to be trained in gun safety."

Blair's Bill that would have its critics, notably the gun lobby.

A 15-year-old and a 16-year-old have been indicted on murder and attempted murder charges for the CTA bus shooting. They've been charged as adults.

...clicky...

Thanks to Alphecca for the link.

You Might Be A Terrorist...

...if:

You believe that Gun Control laws are unconstitutional.

You object to the governments behaviour at Waco/Ruby Ridge.

You fly a "Gadsden" flag and/or believe in the words "Don't Tread On Me."

You are or have been a member of an unorganized militia.

You believe Gun Control is a conspiracy to enslave us starting with the removal of our ability to either defend ourselves or forcefully change our government.

You believe the first ten amendments of The Constitution are God given and all others are temporary, invalid or outright fraudulent.

You believe all judicial authority resides with the people. The jury, not the Judge, directs trials and can nullify laws they do not approve of.

You believe that U.S. sovereignty is being surrendered to the U.N., World Court, and World Bank, with the U.S. becoming an economic region of this New World Order.

You believe that Federal and State governments do not have the legal authority to levy taxes or interfere with travel or private enterprise by requiring licenses or regulating activity or conduct.

This, according to http://www.pa-aware.org/who-are-terrorists/domestic-5.asp

Yep, it looks like I'm a terrorist, if being a terrorist is someone who loves their country to the death. If it is someone who believes in the principles that this country was founded on and believes that the government we have now is far from the government we should have. If it is someone who believes in the the whole bill of rights as written and owns several guns and knows how to use them.

Actually...doesn't that pretty much describe a Patriot?

Well, might as well make it complete and embrace my "terroristness". Here's my Gadsden flag:

Thanks to Blognomicon for the tip.

What the Gun Banners REALLY want!

The disarming of America
-by Dan Simpson

LAST week's tragedy at Virginia Tech in which a mentally disturbed person gunned down 32 of America's finest - intelligent young people with futures ahead of them - once again puts the phenomenon of an armed society into focus for Americans.

The likely underestimate of how many guns are wandering around America runs at 240 million in a population of about 300 million. What was clear last week is that at least two of those guns were in the wrong hands.

When people talk about doing something about guns in America, it often comes down to this: "How could America disarm even if it wanted to? There are so many guns out there."

Because I have little or no power to influence the "if" part of the issue, I will stick with the "how." And before anyone starts to hyperventilate and think I'm a crazed liberal zealot wanting to take his gun from his cold, dead hands, let me share my experience of guns.

As a child I played cowboys and Indians with cap guns. I had a Daisy Red Ryder B-B gun. My father had in his bedside table drawer an old pistol which I examined surreptitiously from time to time. When assigned to the American embassy in Beirut during the war in Lebanon, I sometimes carried a .357 Magnum, which I could fire accurately. I also learned to handle and fire a variety of weapons while I was there, including Uzis and rocket-propelled grenade launchers.

I don't have any problem with hunting, although blowing away animals with high-powered weapons seems a pointless, no-contest affair to me. I suppose I would enjoy the fellowship of the experience with other friends who are hunters.

Now, how would one disarm the American population? First of all, federal or state laws would need to make it a crime punishable by a $1,000 fine and one year in prison per weapon to possess a firearm. The population would then be given three months to turn in their guns, without penalty.

Hunters would be able to deposit their hunting weapons in a centrally located arsenal, heavily guarded, from which they would be able to withdraw them each hunting season upon presentation of a valid hunting license. The weapons would be required to be redeposited at the end of the season on pain of arrest. When hunters submit a request for their weapons, federal, state, and local checks would be made to establish that they had not been convicted of a violent crime since the last time they withdrew their weapons. In the process, arsenal staff would take at least a quick look at each hunter to try to affirm that he was not obviously unhinged.

It would have to be the case that the term "hunting weapon" did not include anti-tank ordnance, assault weapons, rocket-propelled grenade launchers, or other weapons of war.

All antique or interesting non-hunting weapons would be required to be delivered to a local or regional museum, also to be under strict 24-hour-a-day guard. There they would be on display, if the owner desired, as part of an interesting exhibit of antique American weapons, as family heirlooms from proud wars past or as part of collections.

Gun dealers could continue their work, selling hunting and antique firearms. They would be required to maintain very tight inventories. Any gun sold would be delivered immediately by the dealer to the nearest arsenal or the museum, not to the buyer.

The disarmament process would begin after the initial three-month amnesty. Special squads of police would be formed and trained to carry out the work. Then, on a random basis to permit no advance warning, city blocks and stretches of suburban and rural areas would be cordoned off and searches carried out in every business, dwelling, and empty building. All firearms would be seized. The owners of weapons found in the searches would be prosecuted: $1,000 and one year in prison for each firearm.

Clearly, since such sweeps could not take place all across the country at the same time. But fairly quickly there would begin to be gun-swept, gun-free areas where there should be no firearms. If there were, those carrying them would be subject to quick confiscation and prosecution. On the streets it would be a question of stop-and-search of anyone, even grandma with her walker, with the same penalties for "carrying."

The "gun lobby" would no doubt try to head off in the courts the new laws and the actions to implement them. They might succeed in doing so, although the new approach would undoubtedly prompt new, vigorous debate on the subject. In any case, some jurisdictions would undoubtedly take the opportunity of the chronic slowness of the courts to begin implementing the new approach.

America's long land and sea borders present another kind of problem. It is easy to imagine mega-gun dealerships installing themselves in Mexico, and perhaps in more remote parts of the Canadian border area, to funnel guns into the United States. That would constitute a problem for American immigration authorities and the U.S. Coast Guard, but not an insurmountable one over time.

There could conceivably also be a rash of score-settling during hunting season as people drew out their weapons, ostensibly to shoot squirrels and deer, and began eliminating various of their perceived two-footed enemies. Given the general nature of hunting weapons and the fact that such killings are frequently time-sensitive, that seems a lesser sort of issue.

That is my idea of how it could be done. The desire to do so on the part of the American people is another question altogether, but one clearly raised again by the Blacksburg tragedy.

Dan Simpson, a retired diplomat, is a member of the editorial boards of The Blade and Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

Click here to read David Codrea's (The War on Guns) take on this.

Any questions?

Give Them Back!

Katrina Gun Confiscation Video