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.

Comments Feed

Displaying 1-30 of 281 total comments.

kbfreedom 03/29/2009 2:26pm
Link Reply
+ 29
in reply to Anonymous Jan 22, 2009 7:12am

Although I completely agree with this bill as well as support it, I am not accepting of the fact that we need to clarify our second amendment RIGHT. This is preposterous to have to ask for our GOVERNMENT to allow us to live by the rights that they are supposedly “sworn” to. If this doesn’t go through what will anyone here do about it? Will you petition? Will you impeach those who denied this bill? Or will you all sit back and let another part of your lives be controlled by the government? This is our time to change this weak country, it needs to be a country of educated, involved citizens, not a country of irresponsible naives who sit around and play video games while other countries are getting smarter and stronger and more disciplined.

Patriots 01/24/2009 5:03pm
Link Reply
+ 20

Among the natural rights of the colonists are these: First a right to life, secondly to liberty, and thirdly to property; together with the right to defend them in the best manner they can.

Samuel Adams

Shootest45 02/24/2009 1:23pm
Link Reply
+ 16
in reply to shooter Feb 05, 2009 12:14pm

Democracy is two wolves and a lamb discussing what to have for dinner.
A Republic is a well armed Lamb ! !

Anonymous 01/22/2009 7:12am
Link Reply
+ 14

I hope this one goes through. We have a pistol for defence of our family. If that right is not defined and defended- our chance of protecting ourselves and our children will come to a complete hault.

wolf 01/29/2009 2:11pm
Link Reply
+ 12

quote"why the Fed’s have not adopted this yet is beyond me"

because our government is no longer “by the people”. Our government is now making laws that THEY think are best for the people. It dosnt make a difference how much we email or call. our laws are still dicided upon by individuals.

wera308 04/02/2009 1:05pm
Link Reply
+ 11
in reply to kbfreedom Mar 29, 2009 2:26pm

I also support this bill, but I have a hard time understanding why this bill is even needed. Do we really want to start acknowledging that we actually need these measures to justify the second amendment? What is to stop some other greasy politician from amending this bill in the future to change its intent?

shooter 02/05/2009 12:14pm
Link Reply
+ 11
in reply to wolf Jan 29, 2009 2:11pm

You are so right. Every time we let our elected officials know how we feel about an issue, and what we believe, yet they vote opposite to that is another step towards socialism.

jfbyers 02/17/2009 7:35am
in reply to Patriots Jan 24, 2009 5:03pm

Thomas Jefferson For a people who are free, and who mean to remain so, a well organized and armed militia is their best security.

dprcrna 02/05/2009 5:51am

This bill upholds the Constitution, HR-45 does not. IF our President is to keep his oath of office, this is one he should support. Let’s see if he will.

44winchester 01/30/2009 7:47am

I’m all for this one, although how many ways do you have to spell out the right we already have…..The 2nd Admendment. Let us all hope that all the states will adopt the “Castle Doctrine”.

c5matt 02/04/2009 8:31am

to all…address HR45 with your congressmen and tell them to attack it with a patriotic vigor not seen in some time. this bill is the opening salvo of what will become endless attacks upon our second amendment rights during the next four years. we need bills like hr17, not gun licensing b.s. like hr45!!! deo vindice

Anonymous 01/31/2009 10:07am

It’s about time I see some legislation that preserves rights rather than limit them and take them away.

Anonymous 01/26/2009 4:15pm

finally some one has had the fore though to bring what some states all ready acknowlege to the Federal Level. The “Castel Doctrine” is common sense understanding that if my life, the life of my family or another innocent is in immediate peril; I can Kill you weather it’s with a 22 handgun, a .50 BMG Sniper Rifle, or a machety and it is gaurenteed under the 1st amendment of the constitution.

currently states like florida already offere freedom from prosecution in justifiable defensive use of dealy force; why the Fed’s have not adopted this yet is beyond me.

Molon Label – live free.

Shootest45 02/24/2009 1:20pm
in reply to wolf Jan 29, 2009 2:11pm

When the country forgot we were a Republic and started calling America a Democracy is when we gave away the government !! A Republic is a government of the people where the people decide, A democracy is a government where the people give away their rights and let someone else decide what is best for them ! (so they need not bother till they are slaves and it’s too late)

mouseissue 03/14/2009 9:11am
in reply to jeremy_neel Mar 08, 2009 3:53pm

I think what Shootest45 means is a Republic is a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote.

And Democracy (as it exists now in the U.S.) is a form of government in which the supreme power is exercised by elected agents under a free electoral system. Here, the elected agents decide what’s best for the electorate (i.e. the people).

Bottom line… Our democracy has allowed government to assume supreme power over us. This happens when too many people think the government is
the answer to our problems. When in fact, the government has caused most of them.

jeremy_neel 03/08/2009 3:53pm
in reply to Shootest45 Feb 24, 2009 1:20pm

While I agree that the government has gone to shit, please pull out a Webster’s and look up the definition of democracy and republic.

Strankon 04/10/2009 8:53am
in reply to Anonymous Apr 07, 2009 3:28pm

It is not Seditionistic to excerise our frist ammendment right to free speech,and to peaceably assemble, to protest the subversive acts being carried out By the congressional majority, in an attempt to undermine the laws which dictate our political system.(the CONSTITUTION!)

Pinedo 02/10/2009 7:22pm

I don’t own a weapon or plan own one, but I believe fiercely in the Bill of Rights, whether or not it affects me personally. I don’t selfishly pick and chose which rights I like and which I don’t. I hope our representatives will be of the same mind and uphold the Constitution in its full form.

djwalsh1969 04/22/2009 6:24am
in reply to Anonymous Jan 22, 2009 7:12am

Isn’t this what the 2nd Amendment is? We don’t need new laws we need to live by the Constitution! I can’t believe this. It is sad that we have a new law that we already have.

col1968 02/07/2009 3:13pm

This is appropriate to oppose HR 45. Every source of research shows that when honest people have guns, crime is limited. You take away honest people’s rights to defend themselves, by whatever means available, and you give ultimate power to the criminals.

usaii 02/05/2009 2:17pm

simple when a thief breaks into your house or business you should be abe to defend it with any means you have. when they break in to steal they have no rights.

sfrodnaps 04/24/2009 12:14pm
in reply to Anonymous Apr 07, 2009 3:28pm

If you love wealth more that liberty, the tranquility of servitude rather than the animating contest of freedom,——go from us in peace. We ask not for your councils or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands that feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you. And may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.
Like so many of you, you fail to understand that changing the fabric of this nation, and denying the constitution based on an election where these changes were not voted on,is SEDITION! Newmeximan,
I challenge you to become better informed about the principles that formed this nation. As Mr. Jefferson once said, “Those who would be both ignorant and free, are wishing for something that never was and never will be.” Coward MY ASS!

Strankon 04/08/2009 10:01am
in reply to Anonymous Apr 07, 2009 3:27pm

This bill has nothing to do with political preference. It doesn’t matter who won of lost the election, It’s about your God given right to protect yourself, your family, and your property. A right we don’t need the governments permission to uphold.
And because you can’t back up your polling statistics, I’ll give you a couple. just take a look at the votes on H.R. 17 & H.R. 45 at the top of the individuial bill page.

waynetach 02/18/2009 3:58pm

As a corrections officer,(retired) inmates have told me that they fear the home owener with a firearm more than they do the cops. The cops have more restrictions on them than the home owener. I sugest all gun oweners let it be know that we will “not” give in to any Bill that will make a criminial out of me. I support the right to carry,“Anywhare” in the US and will fight anyone who wants to put my freedom to owen a firearm with out registering said firearms. I know the criminal mind and I know what scaers them the most. Sorry about my spelling as I dont know how to correct it here. Wayne Tachell. ID.

bonniebluepatriot 07/23/2010 8:42am
in reply to pramsey Jul 23, 2010 7:55am

Whether there are “accidental deaths” related to firearms has nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment. How many accidental deaths are year are related to bikes, motorcycles, cars, etc. and there aren’t attempts to ban their use. It’s a ridiculous argument that just attempts to divert attention from the real issue.

I agree with you that the main cause of these accidents is due to the lack of knowledge and exposure kids have to firearms today. Used to be firearms were kept in the open, they weren’t a novelty item hidden away. Kids were taught how to use them and how NOT to use them from young ages. Now, they are hidden away and even talking about guns with kids is taboo according to the PC crowd – except to say never use them, never touch them, if you even see one laying around rund in the opposite direction.

The current PC attitude about guns and how access for kids should be severely limited is the caues of theses accidents – it is not the cure.

apache01 07/22/2009 6:13am
in reply to kbfreedom Mar 29, 2009 2:26pm

I do agree with your comments here fully, and would like to add if I may, that not only does the Second Amendment in our Constitution not only speak very clearly our right to keep and bear arms, but we as a people, under this same Constitution, do also have the right to keep those weapons for our own defense in each states Militia, which we do also have the right to have according to the Rights handed to us so wisely all those years ago by our forefathers. No government, not even our own, not on the federal, state, or even local level, should be empowered in any way, to take any of these rights away from even one single law abiding LEGAL citizen of the United States of America.

callagan 04/02/2009 3:03pm
in reply to wera308 Apr 02, 2009 1:05pm

I don’t know if it is even possible, but Obama and Co. would like to implement International Law norm….Now I watched as he bungled the “support and defend the Constitution” oath of office. There are some that think that the International Court and Laws that the EU tried to get the EU member nations to accept would trump our constitution (by the way, no EU member has yet adopted them). Maybe it’s a good time to affirm our rights in yet another bill such as this to keep it on the front burner.

LeMat 10/23/2009 10:22am
in reply to callagan Apr 02, 2009 3:03pm

Treaties cannot supersede the fundamental rights of the Constitution.

“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”

crackpot 09/21/2010 1:32pm
in reply to silverfang77 May 10, 2010 6:24am

I think most of them haven’t read any of the Constitution.

danibenne4 07/02/2009 12:22am

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.


Vote on This Bill

96% Users Support Bill

6085 in favor / 265 opposed
 

Send Your Rep a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments