U.S. Congress - H.R.17 Citizens' Self-Defense Act of 2009
H.R.17 - Citizens' Self-Defense Act of 2009
To protect the right to obtain firearms for security, and to use firearms in defense of self, family, or home, and to provide for the enforcement of such right. view all titles (2)
All Bill Titles
- Short: Citizens' Self-Defense Act of 2009 as introduced.
- Official: To protect the right to obtain firearms for security, and to use firearms in defense of self, family, or home, and to provide for the enforcement of such right. as introduced.
This Bill currently has no wiki content. If you would like to create a wiki entry for this bill, please Login, and then select the wiki tab to create it.
Bill's Views
- Today: 105
- Past Seven Days: 821
- All-Time: 89,847
97%
Users Support Bill
4983 in favor / 168 opposed
Write Your
Representative
-
Share This Bill
More Share via Email
Sort By
Comments Feed ?
What's this?
OpenCongress comment boards are an open forum for discussion. Let's build public knowledge about Congress together, so please keep the discussion civil -- no harsh language, subject to our community Comment Policy. Do not post any information here (for example, your name or email) that you do not wish to be public.
Filter Comments to a Rating of at least
What's this?
The Ratings Filter allows you to determine how many user comments to view on pages here on OpenCongress. Setting the filter higher (towards 10) allows you to see only the comments rated "most helpful" by users, while setting the filter lower (towards 0) allows you to see more comments on a page.
Displaying 211-240 of 240 total comments.
This bill, if passed depends too heavily on HR 45 to pass. In effect, it would "allow" the people the right to keep and bear arms, only if they are registered with the government. For this reason, I oppose this bill.
I truly think this bill is just so criminals can't sue us and get away with it if we are within the law in our actions. After reading the whole bill that's what I got from it anyways.
This is already covered by the second amendment. I guess I'm just simple minded (making laws to cover laws that already exsist). Next month congress will come up with a bill to negate this one...talk about spinning your wheels.
Voting for HJR 17, while appearing to enable Americans Rights, only gives a means for removing not only this and previous resolutions but the entire 2nd Amendment.
We The PEOPLE need to tell Nobama and his Socialist Illuminati that our Rights are not held in their hands, but our own!
I don't know why they need another bill when we have Amendment 2 - Right to Bear Arms. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
The more they change things the more they mess it up by adding other laws alone with the one they are voting on.
If they just had one law per bill that would be great.
If no one voted on a bill they did not read how much better would we all be....
It has ALWAYS been the right of American people to own a firearm to hunt,target shoot, AND defend ourselves against personal harm. It would be for the best if this so called government we must put up with, took care of their own problems at hand and LEAVE OUR PRIVATE RIGHTS ALONE!! This will only start a big problem in a whole bunch of ways.
I think what this bill means to do is to renforce the 2nd amendment and provide a more specific context and definition of self-defense.
There is the school of thought that says the 2nd amendment has nothing to do with individuals, but means that the states have a right to form militias, such as the National Gaurd and reserves we have today.
The other school of thought is that individual citizens have a right to bear arms and defend their home and family. This is my position, and the one that I beleive H.R. 17 seeks to clarify.
I don't need a law to tell me it is OK. Like most people I will do what needs to be done.
This is a good bill! When will we REPEAL THE BRADY ACT and bring freedom back to Amerika?
I don't need the governments permission to protect myself or my family.Maybe one I will run into one of their relatives and have a need to defend them.Wow, Your kin died and so did I and a bunch of innocent people because our government is scared and blind! Wake up and pass bill 197 or this could be a very real scenario someday. Angry in NJ
So long as Home is not weighted more heavily than self and family protection or more to the point defined as premise. If home is where my heart (family) is, and hiking or camping in the woods with the family is covered excellent, Otherwise it's a firebucket shot full of holes.
What most all of you are NOT catching here, is that this bill is attached to HR 45, which says we ALL have to register our guns every five years, and jump thru all their hoops to own guns. Don't be fooled by more of Washington's decietful tactics!!!!! Yes, this is a good and necessary bill, but not the OTHER one it is also attached to, which most everyone so far has voted against! If you agree that we should pass this one, then the other that we DON'T want, HR 45, will also be passed. Come on people, open your damn eyes for a change and stop being led around by Washington like sheep being led to the slaughter, all blind and ignorant to what they're really up to.
Hmmm sounds like another hook and sinker. Thanks! That seams to be the way they are pushing things through lately. "Cap and Trade" ring a bell.
I hope this goes through also.. to bad it still will not protect us from the government taking everything from us and forcing us to shoot up our own children with the swine flu vaccine that has not been tested!!!
I do have some reservations on this law simply regarding its necessity. Considering that is purpose is to prevent legal retribution against those who use firearms in self-defense, I see no reason why this bill can be simply repackaged as an amendment to an already existing self-defense legislation. The section on what is "the use of firearms in the defense of self" is way too small to be implemented effectively and the definition given to what qualifies as self-defense is rather open to interpretation. In fact, since most legislation regarding firearms differs greatly at the state level, I don't see why this can't be implemented at a state level as what is already going on now, saving any trouble coming from any possible inconsistencies between the federal and state level. <http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/07/us/07shoot.html>
How about a Million-Man March on DC?
How do you think the Congress and Senate would react to seeing 1,000,000+ armed citizens standing outside? What would Law Enforcement do? Try and disarm and arrest 1,000,000 armed citizens. Even 50,000 people marching on DC would make a huge impact.
IT IS TIME FOR ACTION. PEACEFUL, YET FIRM.
Sometimes drastic times require drastic measures.
Maybe it's time for a Militia to be formed. A National organization of Gun Owners; not just the NRA. Choose a uniform that everyone can afford (511 is good) and create State, County and City Chapters - just like the Rotary, Lions, and Kiwanis!
Clean up DC, and then clean up the streets and borders.
The second amendment to the Constitution should cover this bill! I'd be wary of backing any other bill that would introduce similar and or conflicting language that could eventually be used against our beloved 2nd amendment!
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. I don't need this law to define that I have this right. It is a God given right that every person is born with and which government cannot take away. I have a right to protect myself and my property from any threat and that includes from a government which professes to want to protect me.
This is unecessary and pandering. Assault/homicide cases are generally determined at the state level, and the states already have laws permitting and defining self-defense.
falcon
I have to agree with this bill. So far I have herd from the press that obama is trying to take away any knife that is over 41/2 inch's long. Now he wants to take away any hand gun or rifle with a clip, and if you don't comply, it's a jail sentence of 5 yrs. The only 2 problems with this is, 1-not enough prisons, 2-the criminals would not cooperate. The other thing is they (police or army or who knows) can come in your house and inspect it for where you keep your guns.
If our elected officials think it is best to not have the protection of weapons, let them try it out for a year or so first.
This bill does add a layer of protection for Americans to defend themselves in the event someone tries to do another harm. I only worry about how the courts will see this bill. My idea of violent harm may be different from a judge and jury's.
ProtoProtoss (1 of 2)
In reference to a comment I read minutes ago, I must completely concur. What congress fails to realize is that no LAW nor BILL will ever apply to criminals. A sign being posted saying "no guns allowed" is simply saying, hey if your a criminal come on in with a gun because nobody inside is allowed to defend themselves. Often I wonder if those passing the bills are planning mischievous deeds in which they are passing this craziness in order to prepare for what they plan to do. It's ridiculous.
There IS no longer a Constitution nor a Bill of Rights nor anything else that was supposed to remain unchanged. As time progresses, every single right we've ever been falsely led to believe we have will eventually be stripped away.
ProtoProtoss (2 of 2)
What happens if we all just say NO. I mean, we outnumber the gov. by far... If they strip us of our defenses then they strip us of our alleged freedom as well as our ABILITY to defend those alleges. People need to wake up and all stand up instead of just letting things go as they may.
We, the people, are like a hand... separated we are just fingers and can individually only do so much. But together... we form a helluva fist and can strike a devastating blow.
This bill is so heavily sopported that it will die because of no action. The Dem's will not bring it to the floor!!!!!!!!!
So is this like what we have in Florida in terms of "Self-Defense"? Took me a few moments to realize that this bill doesn't necessarily apply to me, but I can see why the rest of the states would want this. I say that our great republic should vote this is, as in the constitution we have the right to arm bears and carry guns. What's the point when you cannot use them.
This bill does not fit the nation we live in now and that's why it will never see the light of day. Our society is so focused on the idea of being politically correct and everyone holding hands. This bill would destroy the perfect America we have made. To think people would walk around with guns for protection is just not right. "I'm being sarcastic!"
Once we lose the right to bear arms we are slaves to the government. Hitler banned personal ownership of guns and look what he did. Our president Barack "hussien" Obama is trying very hard to fill the shoes of Hitler and other dictators. It is up to us to keep our firearms and if that requires us to fight for the right then we should. Many men and women since the founding fathers have died for us to keep this right, it may be getting time for us to sacrifice in the same way so that our kids will have a country to call home in the near future.
This to me, seems to be about as useful as hr 45. Another useless bill that will either impede in the people's freedoms, or support those that would cause harm. Why do we need this bill? Apparently the hr 45 and hr 17 authors must be related. They were lying around smoking pot then decided to write something stupid. (Stupid-the act, or lack of, doing something one knows is necessary/unnecessary). This bill is unncessary.
I just have to say the very idea that this bill is necessary is absurd. We have already had the can-or-can't-Americans-own-guns-debate...in case you haven't read a history book recently it happened over 230 years ago! And the answer was so definitely in favor of our right to bear arms that it was listed within the Constitution itself! (Albeit the bill of rights, but as they were amendments are now considered equal to the constitution.) And in case we forgot, the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land.
This bill is a sham. It's an unnecessary waste of tax-payers money. Let the progressive/mao-loving dems try and make it illegal to own a gun. I'll take mine right up to their front door & dare them to arrest me for it. Know your rights Americans. They are attempting again to outstep their powers...it's been happening since the early 20th century and it's time to put a halt to their disgusting growth of federal government powers. They have NO RIGHT to do half the things they're doing!