Thread: Chavez calls on Obama to follow path of socialism

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings

Reminds me that I saw something pretty interesting yesterday.

Take a guess WHO the cosponsors are, of this bill in Congress.

I'll give you a hint- it has already passed this session the Senate:

===========

SEC. 201. SHORT TITLE.

• This title may be cited as the `Second Amendment Enforcement Act'.

SEC. 202. CONGRESSIONAL FINDINGS.

• Congress finds the following:

• 
  
  • (1) The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
  
  

• 
  
  • (2) As the Congress and the Supreme Court of the United States have recognized, the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the rights of individuals, including those who are not members of a militia or engaged in military service or training, to keep and bear arms.
  
  

• 
  
  • (3) The law-abiding citizens of the District of Columbia are deprived by local laws of handguns, rifles, and shotguns that are commonly kept by law-abiding persons throughout the United States for sporting use and for lawful defense of their persons, homes, businesses, and families.
  
  

• 
  
  • (4) The District of Columbia has the highest per capita murder rate in the Nation, which may be attributed in part to local laws prohibiting possession of firearms by law-abiding persons who would otherwise be able to defend themselves and their loved ones in their own homes and businesses.
  
  

• 
  
  • (5) The Federal Gun Control Act of 1968, as amended by the Firearms Owners' Protection Act of 1986, and the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993, provide comprehensive Federal regulations applicable in the District of Columbia as elsewhere. In addition, existing District of Columbia criminal laws punish possession and illegal use of firearms by violent criminals and felons. Consequently, there is no need for local laws which only affect and disarm law-abiding citizens.
  
  

• 
  
  • (6) Officials of the District of Columbia have indicated their intention to continue to unduly restrict lawful firearm possession and use by citizens of the District.
  
  

• 
  
  • (7) Legislation is required to correct the District of Columbia's law in order to restore the fundamental rights of its citizens under the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and thereby enhance public safety.
  
  

SEC. 203. REFORM D.C. COUNCIL'S AUTHORITY TO RESTRICT FIREARMS.

• Section 4 of the Act entitled `An Act to prohibit the killing of wild birds and wild animals in the District of Columbia', approved June 30, 1906 (34 Stat. 809; sec. 1-303.43, D.C. Official Code) is amended by adding at the end the following: `Nothing in this section or any other provision of law shall authorize, or shall be construed to permit, the Council, the Mayor, or any governmental or regulatory authority of the District of Columbia to prohibit, constructively prohibit, or unduly burden the ability of persons not prohibited from possessing firearms under Federal law from acquiring, possessing in their homes or businesses, or using for sporting, self-protection or other lawful purposes, any firearm neither prohibited by Federal law nor subject to the National Firearms Act. The District of Columbia shall not have authority to enact laws or regulations that discourage or eliminate the private ownership or use of firearms. Nothing in the previous two sentences shall be construed to prohibit the District of Columbia from regulating or prohibiting the carrying of firearms by a person, either concealed or openly, other than at the person's dwelling place, place of business, or on other land possessed by the person.'.

SEC. 204. REPEAL D.C. SEMIAUTOMATIC BAN.

• (a) In General- Section 101(10) of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 (sec. 7-2501.01(10), D.C. Official Code) is amended to read as follows:

• 
  
  • `(10) `Machine gun' means any firearm which shoots, is designed to shoot, or may be readily restored to shoot automatically, more than 1 shot without manual reloading by a single function of the trigger, and includes the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machine gun, and any combination of parts from which a machine gun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.'.
  
  

• (b) Conforming Amendment to Provisions Setting Forth Criminal Penalties- Section 1(c) of the Act of July 8, 1932 (47 Stat. 651; sec. 22-4501(c), D.C. Official Code) is amended to read as follows:

• `(c) `Machine gun', as used in this Act, has the meaning given such term in section 101(10) of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975.'.

SEC. 205. REPEAL REGISTRATION REQUIREMENT.

• (a) Repeal of Requirement-

• 
  
  • (1) IN GENERAL- Section 201(a) of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 (sec. 7-2502.01(a), D.C. Official Code) is amended by striking `any firearm, unless' and all that follows through paragraph (3) and inserting the following: `any firearm described in subsection (c).'.
  
  

• 
  
  • (2) DESCRIPTION OF FIREARMS REMAINING ILLEGAL- Section 201 of such Act (sec. 7-2502.01, D.C. Official Code) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
  
  

• `(c) A firearm described in this subsection is any of the following:

• 
  
  • `(1) A sawed-off shotgun.
  
  

• 
  
  • `(2) A machine gun.
  
  

• 
  
  • `(3) A short-barreled rifle.'.
  
  

• 
  
  • (3) CONFORMING AMENDMENT- The heading of section 201 of such Act (sec. 7-2502.01, D.C. Official Code) is amended by striking `Registration requirements' and inserting `Firearm Possession'.(MORE)

SEC. 206. REPEAL HANDGUN AMMUNITION BAN.

• Section 601(3) of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 (sec. 7-2506.01(3), D.C. Official Code) is amended by striking `is the holder of the valid registration certificate for' and inserting `owns'.

SEC. 207. RESTORE RIGHT OF SELF DEFENSE IN THE HOME.

• Section 702 of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 (sec. 7-2507.02, D.C. Official Code) is repealed.

SEC. 208. REMOVE CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR POSSESSION OF UNREGISTERED FIREARMS.

• (a) In General- Section 706 of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 (sec. 7-2507.06, D.C. Official Code) is amended--

• 
  
  • (1) by striking `that:' and all that follows through `(1) A' and inserting `that a'; and
  
  

• 
  
  • (2) by striking paragraph (2).
  
  

• (b) Effective Date- The amendments made by subsection (a) shall apply with respect to violations occurring after the 60-day period which begins on the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 209. REMOVE CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR CARRYING A FIREARM IN ONE'S DWELLING OR OTHER PREMISES.
(more)

SEC. 210. AUTHORIZING PURCHASES OF FIREARMS BY DISTRICT RESIDENTS.
(more)

SEC. 211. REPEALS OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ACTS.

• The Firearms Registration Amendment Act of 2008 and the Firearms Registration Emergency Amendment Act of 2008, as passed by the District of Columbia, are repealed.

SEC. 212. SEVERABILITY.

• (more)

Passed the Senate February 26, 2009.
===============


Who are the cosponsors of this bill, which passes the Senate?

Would you believe:

COSPONSORS(19), ALPHABETICAL

• Sen Carper, Thomas R. [DE] - 1/7/2009
  Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [NY] - 1/6/2009
  Sen Dodd, Christopher J. [CT] - 1/6/2009
  Sen Durbin, Richard [IL] - 1/6/2009
  Sen Feingold, Russell D. [WI] - 1/6/2009
  Sen Feinstein, Dianne [CA] - 2/25/2009
  Sen Hatch, Orrin G. [UT] - 1/6/2009
  Sen Kennedy, Edward M. [MA] - 1/6/2009
  Sen Kerry, John F. [MA] - 1/6/2009
  Sen Landrieu, Mary L. [LA] - 1/7/2009
  Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. [NJ] - 2/23/2009
  Sen Leahy, Patrick J. [VT] - 1/6/2009
  Sen Levin, Carl [MI] - 2/11/2009
  Sen McCaskill, Claire [MO] - 1/7/2009
  Sen Mikulski, Barbara A. [MD] - 1/12/2009
  Sen Sanders, Bernard [VT] - 1/6/2009
  Sen Schumer, Charles E. [NY] - 2/24/2009
  Sen Specter, Arlen [PA] - 2/23/2009
  Sen Voinovich, George V. [OH] - 2/11/2009
  
  
  
  

Senate bill 160.

Originally Posted by Show-me

Not originally, basically just used for the defense of citizens and general welfare. I think the "general welfare" part has been blown way, way, way, out of proportion and the taxes are not "uniform".

I am well aware of what the role of taxes were initially.

If a person that doesn't pay any taxes pays much less than the person that pays taxes to receive the same amount of benefit for those tax supported services. How is that not a redistributing wealth?

Im tired of that phrase being used to characterize only Democrats by Republicans when those same Republicans approved the exact same medicine only 6 months earlier.

I think many are hung up on the redistribution of wealth phrase mainly because "Plumber Joe" got candidate Obama to publicly say that is his goal.

Originally Posted by James48843

Would you believe:


COSPONSORS(19), ALPHABETICAL

• 
  Sen Carper, Thomas R. [DE] - 1/7/2009
  Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [NY] - 1/6/2009
  Sen Dodd, Christopher J. [CT] - 1/6/2009
  Sen Durbin, Richard [IL] - 1/6/2009
  Sen Feingold, Russell D. [WI] - 1/6/2009
  Sen Feinstein, Dianne [CA] - 2/25/2009
  Sen Hatch, Orrin G. [UT] - 1/6/2009
  Sen Kennedy, Edward M. [MA] - 1/6/2009
  Sen Kerry, John F. [MA] - 1/6/2009
  Sen Landrieu, Mary L. [LA] - 1/7/2009
  Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. [NJ] - 2/23/2009
  Sen Leahy, Patrick J. [VT] - 1/6/2009
  Sen Levin, Carl [MI] - 2/11/2009
  Sen McCaskill, Claire [MO] - 1/7/2009
  Sen Mikulski, Barbara A. [MD] - 1/12/2009
  Sen Sanders, Bernard [VT] - 1/6/2009
  Sen Schumer, Charles E. [NY] - 2/24/2009
  Sen Specter, Arlen [PA] - 2/23/2009
  Sen Voinovich, George V. [OH] - 2/11/2009
  
  
  
  

Senate bill 160.

I'm embarrassed to have a Senator from Missouri on that bill.

Originally Posted by ChemEng

More pointless rattling of sabers.

Why wasn't anyone complaining of socialism with TARP 1 under W?

I was loud and clear, here on the board and letters/calls to my so called reps. You know what I stand for, I make no bones about it or try to equivicate my beliefs or posts.

CB

Originally Posted by CountryBoy

I was loud and clear, here on the board and letters/calls to my so called reps. You know what I stand for, I make no bones about it or try to equivicate my beliefs or posts.

CB

I'm think we agree on this one CB. I voted for fiscal responsibility this past election. Sad case is that the Elephants were MUCH further to the left on that issue than the Donkeys. Either way, these times of unconstrained spending have to come to an end sooner or later. Im just hoping its an end that we choose to happen and not are forced to accept.

Originally Posted by ChemEng

I'm think we agree on this one CB. I voted for fiscal responsibility this past election. Sad case is that the Elephants were MUCH further to the left on that issue than the Donkeys. Either way, these times of unconstrained spending have to come to an end sooner or later. Im just hoping its an end that we choose to happen and not are forced to accept.

Yep ChemEng,

Both the Elephants and Jackasses are to blame for this mess and that's what frustrates me more than anything, that folks refuse to take responsibility to admit their side screwed up also and owns this mess also. Bush lost me about the first year into his second term, with his unbridled spending and with Bushes $700 B and BHO's $870 B and counting, plus interest, our great grand children will never be able to pay enough taxes to pay it back. Having children and grand children sure put a differnet spin on how you look at the future, don't they?

I hope we do have a choice also, but I think the Pols have forgotten who they work for, us chattering class folks, and these elistist morons simply don't have a clue. We can't cripple our job producing people with taxes and that will happen. Maybe we need to learn this lesson again, since we've yet to learn it from past experience, and this group sure hasn't learned, cause they've got a socialist agenda panned regardless of the beating, those of us that produce and pay taxes, take and we are being taken.

BHO said everything he did would be transparent; that's why no one had a chance to see what our money was being spent on. It was an emergency, and we couldn't wait for anyone to know the extent of the rape of the taxpaying citizens or what they slipped thru on us and we won't even know about it until it hits us. That's just one example of his many lies, but we seem to expect that from our elected officials anymore and even more accept that w/o batting an eye. That really speaks about what kind of people we have become in this country, to just willing except this type of behavior.

So here's to us pulling ourselves out of this mess, without ripping the constitution apart and becoming the USSA. I didn't use to be for term limits, but my thinking sure has changed on this in the past 10 years or so.

Have a good one,

CB