U.S. Congress - H.R.45 Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009
H.R.45 - Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009
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. view all titles (2)
All Bill Titles
- Short: Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009 as introduced.
- Official: 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. 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: 885
- Past Seven Days: 9,203
- All-Time: 1,019,716
2%
Users Support Bill
327 in favor / 14278 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 61-90 of 1779 total comments.
Forcing "Christian" "values" on Americans is exactly what they were talking about all those years ago. Many, many laws that our founding fathers were against in England were only in place under the guise of religion. Our fathers wanted none of it. (Note that many of the fathers were not, in fact, Christian, but were simply moral and some even monotheistic. Jefferson even created his own "spin" of the Bible that removed supernatural events because he believed that it is the base morals that the Bible presents that are what matter.) Granted, this is a bit of a digression off of the actual topic here, but it's worth noting that you have been misinformed (or perhaps uninformed).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_Bible
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seperation_of_church_and_state
I feel very sorry for you and the vacuum you exist in!!!!!!!
Filtered Comment [show]
what laws that are besed only in Christian dogma would those be?
there is nothing saying yiou have to believe in christ.
if you were smart you would believe in christ now. If you don't do it now you will have to bow before him at the judgement seat and confess that he is God. Then you will spend an eternity in hell. it is not too late to change your mind though.
By the way there is no such thing as an athiest.
if an "athiest" is falling off a cliff, he is going to say "save me" Who is he saying that to? not himself, too a greater being. GOD
First of all, you are not an ATHEIST. You are a God rejecting M O R O N! Sencond of all, you have to follow laws based on a 2,000 year old book because you live in a country founded on that 2,000 year old book. By the way, you are having such a problem with that Book and God because you are more than likely living like a wicked devil and you don't want to change. Revelation 20:15 And whosoever was not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire. You are a sinner and you have one of two choices to make before you meet the God of whom you reject. Either you let Him pay for your sins through the blood of Jesus Christ or you can pay for them yourself in an eternal lake of fire. That is the ultimate issue that you and so many others refuse to face.
god says no on eight :)
(he told me last night in bed)
You said
How is it that your "tolerant church" allows something that God does not? Have you ever read 1 Corinthians 6 or 1 Timothy 1??
<<<< How is it that Jesus condemned The Pharisee's and the Saducee's, before, during and after the Govt beheaded John the Baptist? They were the dominant religions when Jesus walked the earth and Jesus condemned them all for their lack of tolerance for sinners. Have you ever read your bible? Take care of your own salvation in fear and trembling! Mathew Mark Luke John the beloved.>>>>
first of all..God made man AND woman...and sactified the marriage of Adam and EVE,,,not Adam and STEVE...secondly, if you are that outspoken about your religious right to same sex marriages, why are you "annonymous"?...
You said
God made man AND woman, sactified marriage of Adam and EVE, not Adam and STEVE. if you are outspoken about your religious right, why are you "annonymous"?...
<<<<He also made the beasts of the field and everything else that exists and sanctified everything....second, read "Please login or signup unless you wish to post anonymously" ..given your Adam and Eve outburst,why don't you state your name. You stuck on the story of sodom and gomorrah? they were eating, drinking and YES marrying when the fire came upon them...in the old testament, the floods of Noah came while they were eating drinking and marrying. Seems God isn't forgiving of heteros. My cousin is gay, and I love her!>>>>>
Have you ever read Leviticus? It says there that a man that lies with a man like with woman kind is an abomination and shall be destroyed. Does God think it is okay for same sex relationships? NO that is what is destroying this nation today is immoral things such as this.
it wasnt steve it was henry
Do you realize how crazy you sound? "The ban of same sex marriage is an assault on religous freedom". It was God that said homosexuality was wrong, not the 1st or 9th amendments.
no god told me last night in bed he was no on 8
It was some guy that wrote Leviticus that said it not God/gods/what ever. There is no proof what so ever that a higher being wrote or said anything that any Holy book that has been written by man says. Show me the proof, guess what you can't because it is not there. The Bible was written by man. The books that are in the bible ware voted on by MAN. Some books were thrown out because those that decides which should be in the Bible disagreed with them. I have asked this of many pious people that I've known and not one can show proof. They only thing they can say is that you have to have Faith. Well guess what, every Religion the world has ever had has been based off FAITH it does not mean they are right.
The SAME ARGUMENT could be made for Human Sacrifice, as for Same Sex Marriage, under the auspices of Religious Freedom. That's NOT a Constitutional Rights issue. The Constitution protects your right to practice your religion, not to do whatever you please, by calling it religion. Similarly, the Constitution protects "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms" by stating that right "shall not be infringed" - provided you aren't breaking the law. This bill is an infringement of the right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms, gay marriage bans are not Rights issues, they procedural matters. Plain and simple.
The difference here is that Human Sacrifice is hurting someone while Same Sex marrige is not. This is a poor argument. And no I'm not a Anti-American Democrat but I do belief in the freedom of Same sex marrage after all this does not hurt me anymore than regular marrage. In fact I think it is a petty thing to be arguing about. I mean let say the Christian (pick one) view of the universe is true (god forbid) then souldn't be God how should judge them and not you? To finish this off I believe in the Constitution, I opposed to Communism and Socilism. Believe in a strong Military, I'm Pro-Choice. And I'm Anti-Gore. I love my SUV as much as I love my guns, I'd be damn if I'll let anyone take them away.
Same sex marriage is a sin, READ YOUR BIBLE. You will find its Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.
Then your "tolarnt Church" is not a biblical church. Jusus never called for tolarnce he called for truth. Read the Bible you claim to stand on.
same sex marriage is banned in a book I read it is called the BIBLE SOME WERE IN ROMANS .I belive homosexuals do deserve and should be protected under the law yes civil unions yes MARRIAGE NO!
Take Eastern Oregon and Washington with openly conservative California. Likewise, take the western parts of Washington and Oregon and throw those together. Everybody wins!
what doe's gays church adam&eve got to do with the second amendment
get back on track.
Filtered Comment [show]
You are a naive idiot if you think cops all cops will support gun bans.
Marines won't support the gun laws, because it's a constitutional right to bear arms. Everyone who ever served swore to defend the constitution, from all enimies, forign and domestic.
Cops do not "hand out punishments" the arrest suspects. That is the job of the Judge.
Real America?? Give me a break already. I'm tired of that condescending BS from you people.
This bill was introduced by the guy from IL. Is that not real america? And yes, it must be squelched before it even gets to a vote.
Sorry, but you could'nt be any further from the truth. FEMA camp's over 600 in the U.S have been already constructed when Martial Law is inposed for a Terroist event or FINACIAL collapse..http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1VOMsJapZM&feature=related
I agree this bill needs to squelched before it goes any farther. I was brought up a law abiding citizen and my country is bound and determined to make me a fellon I refuse to register my guns and or my ammunition so if it's a fight they want I will be a front runner and will die defending our 2nd amendment rights!
Amen! I'm 23 years law enforcement and 3 years military. I have yet to see a gun law/restriction such as this do any good for saving lives, it only causes major civil unrest with peaceful law abiding citizens!
I could not agree with you more! I too am a military veteran (8 years)and a strong supporter of the Constitution. Like you, my oath was to uphold the Constitution - not the politicians, not unconstitutional codes or statutes. That oath does not have an expiration date. (Yes, I'm an Oath-Keeper.)
This bill, which needs to be stiffled immediately, is clearly unconstitutional and the 'representative' that introduced it should be run out of D.C.
Doesn't anyone find it strange that Vermont, which consistantly boasts one of the lowest crime rates in America every year, allows its citizens to CARRY (concealed and unconcealed) their firearms in public; yet now the feds want us to get a license for the sake of safety? Hrmmm... sounds like they need to check their facts.