2009-11-23T13:23:01Z opencongress.org tag:opencongress.org,2007:/bill/comments/54050 2009-11-23T13:23:01Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-11-23:/comment/171508 john01 Amongst these posts I found a most interesting post................... "I don't understand America's love affair with fire arms, specially guns. In most civilized contries in the world, gun owners, or person that poses one, are not considered very highly in society, for various reasons of course. I think we should start evolving from the wild, wild, west era. ".................. Now as I stated before I am a Peace Officer. I disagree with what this post and what President Obama says about us being a civilized nation. Civilized people do not murder, rape, abuse or rob one another. A civilized society would not have sexual predators and people who prey upon the elderly. The real fact is that the police are not everywhere at all time to protect the people. Sometimes the people need to protect themselves. This world is anything but civilized. 2009-11-23T13:06:15Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-11-23:/comment/171497 john01 I am a peace officer in the state of california. I work in a southern California city plagued with violence and drugs. I oppose this bill, why? law abiding citizens are not the cause of gun violence. They (law abiding citizens) do not commit the heinous crimes you see on tv. This bill will do nothing to prevent the criminals from obtaining arms. We need to stop oppressing the good citizens that lawfully possess thier gun but actually enforce the established gun laws for criminals. We need to fix our justice system and make it nondesirable to use a gun in the commision of a crime. I cannot even tell you all how many times we look into persons criminal history and find multiple firearms offenses. Manage the criminal, not the citizen. 2009-11-21T20:46:21Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-11-21:/comment/170931 duvexy Well, there goes the second amendment rights. 2009-01-14T16:45:11Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-01-14:/comment/77054 brian4jc Columnist David Codrea of Guns Magazine, calls it a "ridiculous affront to liberty." "This is nothing less than a declaration of war on American gun owners," Codrea writes in Gun Rights Examiner. - Drew Zahn, WorldNet Daily One thing we don't need is more restrictions on gun owners. Again, we find that the US Government is looking to impose laws that restrict those of us who are law-abiding citizens. If they think that a law of this nature will keep the criminals from having guns, they're dead wrong. In each instance of gun restrictions, all we find is that the only people who have weapons are the criminals. Do we think that somehow criminals will see the light and turn in their weapons? No...only those of us who legally carry will be forced to abide or become criminals ourselves. Stay safe...stay armed. 2009-11-13T02:45:24Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-11-13:/comment/167583 xraygirl30 or any politician, for that matter!! I am starting to think we need a bunch of people who aren't politicians running the government... and let us "common folk" start to take the country back. 2009-10-23T18:50:04Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-10-23:/comment/150303 BushMaster63 I am deeply concerned for the welfare of all, and what is proven by by the insideous NWO proponents that support this bill. I am a disabled OIF veteran who came back with mtbi, ptsd, and other injuries. what I haven't seen anyone comment on is the fact that if this illegal law is passed, that anyone can be stripped of their rights to possess a firearm based solely a psychiatric diagnosis. The point I'm making here is this: You may be of sound body & mind, but all it takes is one biased little piss ant with a silly degree to ruin you, which already happens daily- just ask any veteran. I may have psychiatric illness, but that was born in the service of the country with which I vowed to defend, and still do, and will not forfeit my rights under any circumstance except for my dying breath, from my cold, dead fingers........., and even then they better watch out!!. 2009-02-19T10:40:24Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-02-19:/comment/88384 Anonymous I couldn't agree more the politicians of this country are a bunch of retarded corrupt idiots who on a daily basis basically force the hand of law abiding Americans. I simply cannot understand how the corrupt idiots think this bill would do anything to quell crime in America or anywhere else. I hate guns and war and violence and if I had a magic wish i'd rid the world of all firearms and munitions of any kind but we all know thats not gonna happen. So as the old saying goes if you take the guns away from the good people only the BAD people WILL have guns!!!!! As far as a civil war goes in the earlier comment I believe that person mispoke.I believe what he/she intended to say was that this country IS headed for a REVOLUTION , it's only a matter of time now. 2009-04-30T14:25:29Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-04-30:/comment/104896 AlmostFreeAmerican 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. 2009-03-11T11:16:23Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-03-11:/comment/94998 Hodmokrin Wrong. Seems like you should read it again. Our founding fathers did not want ANY kind of religion tied to government. They had just fought England which was heavily controlled by the church(one of many reasons for revolution.). This is why America exists. Maybe you should READ the constitution for yourself before you interpret it. Here ya go... First Ammendment - Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. NO LAW RESPECTING AN ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION - There it is... 2009-03-30T20:33:53Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-03-30:/comment/99775 PJKoch Fact: Less than 1% of all gun homicides involve innocent bystanders. - Sherman, Steele, Laufersweiler, Hoffer and Julian, “Stray bullets and ‘mushrooms’”, 1989, Journal of Quantitative Criminology Deaths Fact: About 11% of police shootings kill an innocent person - about 2% of shootings by citizens kill an innocent person. The odds of a defensive gun user killing an innocent person are less than 1 in 26,000. And that is with citizens using guns to prevent crimes almost 2,500,000 times every year. - C. Cramer, and D. Kopel "Shall Issue: The New Wave of Concealed Handgun Permit Laws”. Independence Institute Issue Paper. October 17, 1994 I could go on, but you get the point. 2009-03-23T22:22:50Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-03-23:/comment/97819 onedaycloser I do understand why you think the HR 45 Bill should be passed. However, my concern is the people on the streets. They have more opportunities to obtain firearms illegally. This would make it much easier for them to injure or kill more innocent people because we, as the innocent people, wouldn't be able to defend ourselves against something like that. I wouldn't have so much of a problem with this bill if you were able to keep illegal arms off the streets. They're the ones that concern me. Not the ones that don't want to cause harm to anybody. It looks to me that it's much easier for the people that don't have any business having guns (the criminals) than it is for someone who wants or needs to defend their home and families. In essence, I do not agree with this Bill. I believe we as the United States of America, have the right to bear arms!!!! 2009-06-15T17:07:07Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-06-15:/comment/109777 RVTaylor Fellow Americans and patriots, this continual assault on the 2nd amendment has absolutely nothing to do with safety or keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. No my friends, as has been proven so many times now, this is ALL about disarming the public so that they have no means to defend themselves against their own tyranical government should the need arise. Not only did the Founders create this to make it possible for the populace to repel invaders from without, provide food and defend themselves, but also to have the means to rise up and remove a government that no longer represents their interests in any fashion. Everything else the leftists say is just a smoke screen to hide their real intent. Once you understand this, the rest becomes HD clear. If they are ever able to disarm us, freedom will become a distant memory. 2009-03-03T13:04:07Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-03-03:/comment/92965 ruick oh jeez... where do i start... first off bobnanner, half of your argument doesn't even make sense logically. You used the slippery slope logical fallacy as well as the Reductio ad Hitlerum fallacy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum slippery slope:"A slippery slope argument states that a relatively small first step inevitably leads to a chain of related events culminating in some significant impact, much like an object given a small push over the edge of a slope sliding all the way to the bottom". its a pretty basic logical fallacy, which doesn't make any sense. If you know how to read you can click my link and read into it i don't feel like explaining basic logic here. 2009-03-11T11:16:48Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-03-11:/comment/95000 Hodmokrin Want some more... Article V - The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. NO RELIGIOUS TEST SHALL EVER BE REQUIRED AS A QUALIFICATION - hmm, what does that mean to you? Article 2 Section 1 - Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:--"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." Notice there is no "so help me God" this has been added by some presidents since and is not required in any way. 2009-10-23T20:21:31Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-10-23:/comment/150361 BushMaster63 Another important point to ponder is this, all veterans are being watched by the dept. of homeland security as potential "Lone Wolf Terrorists", What a kick in the teeth to this country's finest citizens!!. We all know the warped intentions of the radical leftist regime that is tightening its grip around us, and before they can proceed with their utter destruction of the finest country in the world. But two things stands in their way.....a little document called the constitution, and the right of this nations citizens to defend themselves against all enemies, BOTH FORIEGN AND DOMESTIC!!. They will never accomplish their mission as long as we have our firearms, and free speech!!. 2009-03-26T12:14:45Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-03-26:/comment/98473 kbfreedom What part of this is treasonous? The part where our RIGHT to bear arms is constantly being obstructed, mutated, and disregarded. And yet the people who want to have such FREEDOMS are condemned and labeled as fanatics. to own a gun is not mandatory, neither is self defense, no one says you have to stop someone from killing you, but it IS your right to do so by any means necessary. And the government has no right to mediate any of OUR FREEDOMS! They DO NOT have the right. However it is our RESPONSIBILITY to teach and mediate our own. We have slipped back and let others control our lives instead of managing our own it is our fault we let the government do these things. Treason would be turning your back on Americans and letting others from outside and within to harm your fellow Americans. 2009-08-24T17:47:45Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-08-24:/comment/121186 dolchmann CONTACT BOBBY: Official website: http://www.house.gov/rush/ Address: 2416 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 Phone: 202-225-4372 Fax: 202-226-0333 This abomination of a house resolution ALREADY EXISTS YOU GOVERN MENTALS. Try enforcing the gun laws already on the books. This resolution is a waste of taxpayer time, money and resources. Here is an idea: for every nonsense resolution the sponsor and co-sponsors should be made to pay back the government for all paper used up in the communication of the ridiculous resolution, should be made to pay back for all phone time, computer time, and gas used for creating and placing this resolution into the docket. ps: FIRE BOBBY RUSH FROM OFFICE. 2009-02-27T11:40:12Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-02-27:/comment/91300 Anonymous Please, Representatives, Senators, stop this robbery of my freedom. After reading what this bill is going to do, I now fear my government, I fear my President, and I fear the US representatives that introduced this bill. I want the freedoms guaranteed to me in the Bill of Rights, I want my Second Amendment freedom. We the people are not stupid, we know what this is about, and we know what the outcome is. It is no secret that the authors of this bill wish to take all guns from all citizens. Please. Stop. Those of you in support of this bill are cruel, totalitarian, mean spirited, and have no concern for American Freedom. I will remember every Representatives and Senators name in support, and so will many others. I will be silent no longer. -Anonymous (for honest fear of being one day thrown in jail for my viewpoint) 2009-04-11T20:46:15Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-04-11:/comment/102095 jsterlingf We are here to talk gun control, not religion, but if you want an argument on religion, I'm game. I think we should pick a better venue for it, however. No religious test means they do not have to claim any religious affiliation nor will any religious affiliation disqualify them, not that they must be without religion. That is fine - that is the intent of the Constitution. Do you think for a minute though that the founding fathers meant for those taking office to mean that they would be irreligious, irreverent, not bound by any moral code, believing that there is no purpose to life, and to eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow you shall die? WE NEED MORAL MEN AND WOMEN TO GUIDE AND GOVERN. If they can do it without religion in their lives, that is fine with me, but the MOST moral, people I have ever met, are affiliated with some kind of religion and usually have deep convictions. 2009-03-01T10:45:45Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-03-01:/comment/91978 Anonymous HEY CONGRESS! Remember, you work for us. Let us also remember that we have the right to ask them to step down if they are not representing the goals, needs and rights of their respective constituencies. We do not have to set back and accept their voting patterns which are based on an internal process of 'saving their job' more than saving their charges. If your Congressman or Senator is failing, make it VERY PUBLIC, as many times as you can, on as many blogs as you can. Email the very public News entities who can post your true feelings about Political Failure. What have you got to lose? Your freedoms that the boys in Iraq, Afganistan, Vietnam, Korea, and the WW2 laid down their lives for. They say they are doing for the good of the Nation, but its for their own that they craft a bill to remove our rights while giving themselves raises, full benefits, and full retirement as nothing but "PART-TIME" workers.