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 31-60 of 281 total comments.

  • 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

  • Comm_reply
    jfbyers 02/17/2009 7:35am

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

  • Comm_reply

    Filtered Comment [ show ]

  • Comm_reply
    kbfreedom 03/29/2009 2:29pm

    Why aren’t you trying to start something? Are you afraid of your government and what they will do to you? You should be because we are manipulated and herded around by them, they control our minds and our will right now. And it is no ones fault but our own for letting them do so. It is time to start something.

  • Moderated Comment

  • Comm_reply
    mfitzy111 04/08/2009 7:43am
    Link Reply
    + -3

    your the guy afraid of gun owners. I’d say your the coward.

  • Comm_reply
    Strankon 04/10/2009 8:53am

    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!)

  • Comm_reply
    sfrodnaps 04/24/2009 12:14pm

    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!

  • Comm_reply
    mramoneda 12/17/2009 6:40pm

    That was beautiful pros, sfrodnaps. I applaud you.

  • 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.

  • Comm_reply
    Anonymous 02/11/2009 8:03am

    “or another innocent”

    Where in the bill does it say you can defend someone other than yourself or your family?

    Does that mean personal bodygaurds can no longer protect someone unless they are family? Presidential bodygaurds? Celebrity bodygaurds? Will they loose their job or be sentenced in court for hurting someone in self defense for someone outside of themselves or family?

  • 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.

  • Comm_reply
    shooter 02/05/2009 12:14pm
    Link Reply
    + 11

    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.

  • Comm_reply
    Shootest45 02/24/2009 1:23pm
    Link Reply
    + 16

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

  • Comm_reply
    ep50269 03/14/2009 8:01am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    wish i would have said that

  • Comm_reply
    apache01 07/28/2009 3:21am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    Well, I kinda hate to say this, but our government is much more closely affilitated with a Communistic type than either a Socialist or a Republic type of government. Over time, and you can check with older dictionaries yourself, people, change the definitions of words, or use words inappropriately until the meaning is changed. A true Socialist government, as I was taught in school, and by the older definitions in the older dictionaries, IS more for the people. A Republic type government, is more controlling like a monarchy. Is the Republic of China a well armed Lamb as you say here?, or the Republic of Georgia for that matter? No!!! Republics are more closely defined as dictatorships with a controlling body or small group of leaders! This country, if you do the research you’ll see for yourself, was set up NOT as a Republic! It didn’t become a Republic until Lincoln who led us into our own civil war.

  • Comm_reply
    biliff1 09/24/2009 9:39am

    Shootest, I believe that you and I may agree on many things. This, being one of them. I once heared the saying that a politition’s first job was to get elected. A polititions second job was to get re-elected! I have to disagree with one thing you said. What you said is not a step towords socialism, it’s a step towords Fascism! The constitution couldn’t be any more clear; The right to bear arms shall not be infringed. Too many voters in this country want the government to govern thier lives so they don’t have any personal accountability. Funny how, as I age, I drift further away from the republican party (but not to the left). The libertarians are making more sense to me every day They are the TRUE constitutionally focused party.

  • Comm_reply
    womanx 11/11/2009 7:23am

    Exactly, that is why we need to get involved in making sure we take names and kick out the ones that go against what the American people want. Let people know about this web site and how they can follow the bills and see how their elected officials have voted on a particular subject. Lets all make a difference this comming election, take back our Country. Take back our freedoms that have been given away to big government throughout the years. How many politicians have gotten rich by selling out America? Thats why they go into little rooms behind closed doors to make deals where the American people can’t see what they are doing. They are corrupt and need to be delt with next election!

  • Comm_reply
    Shootest45 02/24/2009 1:20pm

    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)

  • Comm_reply
    jeremy_neel 03/08/2009 3:53pm

    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.

  • Comm_reply
    mouseissue 03/14/2009 9:11am

    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.

  • Comm_reply
    xaajjaax 04/16/2009 6:10pm

    It is not in the unadulterated definition of a republic that any official is elected. A republic is the governmental structure in which there are branches and offices with specific powers and duties.
    The fact that our officials are elected by popular vote by citizens is a measure of democracy. Contrast the pure democracy of ancient Athens to the Roman republic.

  • Comm_reply
    apache01 07/28/2009 3:37am

    Yes this is true. But you also need to take into account, that the “Electoral College” here, and NOT the popular vote of the people, decides who the President is! Why do you think so many of the Presidential Candidates go to the states with the largest number of Electoral votes first, then TRY to make it to the states with lesser numbers of Electoral votes after they’ve first made it to the larger numbered electoral states? It’s all lies and deception. Like a bill passing the Senate, then just before it’s voted on in the House, somebody attaches some bill that had been shot down by all previously on its own, so it will get through. All these last minute add ons should be considered a Criminal Action no matter who does it, or what their reason is for doing it. That’s how our government has STOLEN so much power over all these years since our countries conception.

  • Comm_reply
    akdave 05/14/2009 8:08pm

    i agree..and, o’ course..have sumthing to add..heh..CENTRAL gov’t is perhaps a more basic issue..what about state’s rights ..?..i’d rather have em,..closer ta home…they kin feel the heat better…i’m into the states passing resolutions concerning their own soveriegnty…(spell check)..the civil war told us what the feds think of that concept…you want what the constitution says??..sry..guess we’ll have ta kill ya..hmm..hope we don’t have ta go down that road agin

  • Comm_reply
    gaskorup 04/02/2009 10:24am

    here in resides our Dilemma: our reps act only in self interest and breach our 1st amendment right to “regress” and only allow “petition” but not actual “redress of grievances”. So much for a republic!

  • Comm_reply
    apache01 07/28/2009 3:29am

    Yeah, I agree! He has this all twisted bassackwards.

  • Comm_reply
    apache01 07/28/2009 3:28am

    See, here again you have that backwards Shootest45. It was FOUNDED as a Democracy by The Continental Congress after we broke away from England’s tyrannical dictatorship over the colonies. It turned into a Republic afterwards, and THAT’S, when we started loosing control of our own nation. Don’t take what I’m telling you as truth. Do the historical research yourself and study over how it’s all been changed yourself. Lincoln sold us out to be a Republic to big money and Wall Street and Corporate America with Englands pursuasive help and backing during his campaigns. Think about it, who supported and backed the North during our own civil war? England! See for yourself.

  • Comm_reply
    rforant27406 08/10/2009 8:16am

    apache01 and you are an idiot the south was supported by england because they wanted cheap cotton and tobacco until they realized that a victory with the south was not possible then they withdrew support. You are the one that needs to research history bud because you must have forgotten when and why the 10 amendment was put into the bill of rights, that the powers not delegated expressly to the federal government by the constitution was given to the individual states with supreme power left to the people to determine if the government and its laws were right for them. Now, we lost a lot of power when the the great depression hit in the 30’s because Roosevelt was passing his alphabet soup bills that made a lot of state responsibilities federal ones.

  • 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”.

  • Comm_reply
    Shootest45 02/24/2009 1:41pm
    No where in the Bill of Rights does it say the right to protect ourselves from bad people, what it does say is: We the people have the right to bear arms to defend ourselves and our country from foreign or domestic tyrannical governments.

    It also states that:
    Having said arms we need to be come proficient with them. And that being capable we are to belong to a well regulated non regimented militia, no uniforms, no meetings, no drills. Minute men so to speak.
    Well, Thomas Jefferson did not believe this because he was a devout christian and would not sign it to be ratified so a last paragraph was added:
    If firearms and war was against your christian belief, you could be a conscientious objector and not have to comply?

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