H.R. 45

The anti-gunners aka anti-freedom, anti-2nd amendment establishment are at it again. This time it is H.R. 45 also known as the Blair Holt Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009. I guess that the people who were elected to represent us, to maintain and uphold the Constitution of these United States fall low in the order of importance. Building a warchest for the next election, ruthlessly attacking anyone with a dissenting view, spending time and money trying to take away the one right that helps protect all of our rights.

Ever wonder what a politician would look like if they had a real job? Lets see, they only work when they want, they can take money from outside sources to help secure their vote on a project. And of course they are fighting against the very fabric that holds the company together.

H.R. 45 Blair Holt Bill attempts to make it illegal to own a handgun unless you have a federal license to own a handgun. It will take an applicant to go through a process including taking written tests, giving all personal information including place of birth, thumbprints, and as the icing on this sour smelling dessert each each person has to sign and give access to the Attorney General OR an authorized representative that the Attorney General chooses, any mental health records pertaining to the applicant.

I wonder how many of the Amendments that would break. Certainly the Second Amendment. It would also certainly violate the Fourth Amendment.

This is incredibly frightening. I took the time to write Senator Diane Feinstein who is a strong advocate of stealing our guaranteed rights, starting with the Second Amendment. Below is the original letter I wrote, the Senator's response and my response back to her. Folks, read this. Read her words. Notice her wording. Forget the window dressing that is complete crap that she supports the Second Amendment. She lays it out plainly. I don't think I have heard a more obvious attack on the people of the United States that believe that we have the right of self protection. This is a direct quote:

"I appreciate that there are many law abiding gun owners who use their weapons for activities such as hunting and sport in a safe and effective manner and I support an individual's Second Amendment right to own a gun for such purposes."

So in other words we can hunt but cannot protect ourselves. Of course the next step is to limit what can be used to hunt with. And then limit the ammunition. Oh wait that is already moving through the politicians in Sacramento. Here is the full text of the letters.

H.R. 45 is an attack against our 2nd Amendment rights and is an attempt to

incrementally ban all guns within the United States. I urge you to use the power

of your office to oppose this bill. As one of your constituents I would like you to

respond to this email and let me know how you intend to respond to this legislation.

To protect our Constitution should be the basis of your service to the Country.

Those that came long before you wrote out a perfect document. A personal dislike of

firearms or in the ownership of them should not stop you from upholding the

Constitution including the Second Amendment which guarantees the right of Americans to

keep and bear arms. This has recently been upheld very specifically in the Supreme

Court in District of Columbia V. Heller. As a Registered Nurse with many years

experience in a busy Emergency Department I have seen many people come in with injuries

caused by criminals while the victim was unable to defend themselves. Approving

H.R. 45 will give more freedom to the criminals while restricting the Freedoms

guaranteed us by the Constitution.With the Constitution and the backing of

the Supreme Court I strongly urge opposition to this bill which clearly

infringes the right guaranteed by the Second Amendment.

With the Constitution and the backing of the Supreme Court I strongly urge

opposition to this bill which clearly infringes the right guaranteed by the

Second Amendment.

Dear Mr. Peek:

Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition to the "Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009" (H.R. 45). I appreciate hearing from you and I welcome the opportunity to respond.

On January 6, 2009, Representative Bobby L. Rush (D-IL) introduced the "Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009", which would amend the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act and prohibit an individual from possessing a firearm unless that person has been issued a license under the Act. In addition, it would proscribe license application, issuance, and renewal requirements. H.R. 45 is awaiting action in the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.

During my tenure in the Senate, I have worked hard to introduce and support common-sense gun control legislation designed to keep our cities and neighborhoods safe. Additionally, I have worked to prevent criminals and children from having access to firearms. For example, I authored legislation to restrict large-capacity ammunition magazines and ban Assault Weapons, which was enacted into law in 1994. Unfortunately, that ban expired in 2004. At the same time, however, I appreciate that there are many law abiding gun owners who use their weapons for activities such as hunting and sport in a safe and effective manner and I support an individual's Second Amendment right to own a gun for such purposes.

Please know that I understand your views with regard to establishing additional laws on the sale and licensing of firearms. It is helpful for me to hear the views of Californians throughout the legislative process. Finally, while there is currently no companion legislation to H.R. 45 in the Senate, I will keep your thoughts in mind should such legislation be considered in the future.

Once again, thank you for taking the time to write to me. I hope you will continue to keep me informed on matters of importance to you. Best regards.

Sincerely yours, Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator

Dear Senator;

I appreciate your response to my letter opposing H.R. 45. However the very things you say in that response tells me that you are NOT a supporter of the Second Amendment and therefore are not working in the best interest of the people you serve.

The Second Amendment is very clear. One of the words often forgotten is infringed as "shalll not be infringed". Yet in your response it states "I appreciate that there are many law abiding gun owners who use their weapons for activities such as hunting and sport in a safe and effective manner and I support an individual's Second Amendment right to own a gun for such purposes." The Second Amendment is not about hunting or sport, although those are perfectly legitimate reasons to own a firearm. It is about self protection, the right we have as citizens in a free nation to protect ourselves and others from those wishing to do harm. In the recent Heller decision by the Supreme Court they say specifically that one has the right to "keep and bear arms" for protection.

I am also very concerned about the part of H.R. 45 saying that to possess a firearm that a person must be issued a license. Do you not agree that would be infringing on the right to keep and bear arms?

Your very history of writing the assault weapon ban law and the large capacity magazine laws show that you are out of touch with the reality of people that live in the state. There is little or no evidence that those laws have done anything to "prevent criminals and children from having access to firearms. All those laws do is prevent those that are, at least should be, covered under the Second Amendment from aquiring firearms that have been villified by a name "assault rifle".

I wonder what would happen if you tried to restrict people from the First Amendment. Or they had to get a license to have free speech, but then they could only talk about 1 subject at a time because of the new law preventing multiple subjects. Maybe the press would not like being told that a newspaper can only have 1 article instead of many because they could attack many subjects without reloading...oh I meant reprinting.

The Second Amendment means exactly what it says. The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. And Senator Feinstein I take it very seriously that you are infringing on my rights and those of every other citizen of this great country.

I would greatly love to hear your responses to this letter.

Thank You again for taking the time to respond

Dennis Peek RN

Do not let this happen. Do not let the officials that we elect use the power we give them to break down the fabric that holds us together.

We have the right to be able to defend ourselves. More than 200 years ago our founding Fathers perceived this threat. That is the reason for the Second Amendment. To protect ourselves from those wishing to do us or our family harm and to protect ourselves from a tyrannical government.

Thanks for reading. Stayed tuned for more.

Dennis the one eyed shooter :)