look whats new on the IRS 2010 Tax Return

[FL450]

I received the email below, I have not had time to confirm the information, Maybe some one can help confirm or deny the following;



It begins... more Freedom gone... the right to protect yourself and your family gone! Now ALL GUNS must be listed on your next (2010) tax return!


Senate Bill SB-2099 will require us to put on our 2009 1040 federal tax form all guns that you have or own.
It will require fingerprints and a tax of $50 per gun.
This bill was introduced on February 24, 2009, by the Obama staff. BUT, this bill will only become public knowledge 30 days after the new law becomes effective! This is an amendment to the Internal Revenue Act of 1986. This means that the Finance Committee has passed this without the Senate voting on it at all. Trust Obama? You must be kidding!

The full text of the IRS amendment is on the U.S. Senate homepage: http://www.senate.gov" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. You can find the bill by doing a search by the bill number, SB-2099.


Text of H.R.45 as Introduced in House: Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009: http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h45/text" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Obama's Congress is now starting on the firearms confiscation bill. If it passes, gun owners will become criminals if you don't fully comply.
It has begun... Whatever Obama's "Secret Master Plan" is... this is just the 'tip of the iceberg!'
Very Important for you to be aware of a new bill HR 45 introduced into the House. This is the Blair Holt Firearm Licensing & Record of Sale Act of 2009.
Even gun shop owners didn't know about this because the government is trying to fly it under the radar as a 'minor' IRS revision, and, as usual, the 'political' lawmakers did not read this bill before signing and approving it!
To find out about this - go to any government website and type in HR 45 or Goggle HR 45 Blair Holt Firearm Licensing & Record of Sales Act of 2009. You will get all the information.
Basically this would make it illegal to own a firearm - any rifle with a clip or ANY pistol unless: 1) It is registered 2) You are fingerprinted 3) You supply a current Driver's License 4) You supply your Social Security number 5) You will submit to a physical & mental evaluation at any time of their choosing
Each update change or ownership through private or public sale must be reported and costs $25. Failure to do so you automatically lose the right to own a firearm and are subject up to a year in jail.
There is a child provision clause on page 16 section 305 stating a child-access provision. Gun must be locked and inaccessible to any child under 18. They would have the right to come and inspect that you are storing your gun safely away from accessibility to children and fine is punishable for up to 5 years in prison.
If you think this is a joke - go to the website and take your pick of many options to read this. It is long and lengthy. But, more and more people are becoming aware of this. Pass the word along. Any hunters in your family pass this along.
This is just a "termite" approach to complete confiscation of guns and disarming of our society to the point we have no defense - chip away a little here and there until the goal is accomplished before anyone realizes it.
This is one to act on whether you own a gun or not..

<Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress) <http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.45> :
<H.R.45: Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009 - U.S. Congress - OpenCongress <http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h45/show>
< H.R. 45: Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009 (GovTrack.us) <http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-45>

[PBratton]

Last I heard there was no one willing to support this bill...

[C-dub]

It's bogus.

Check here:
http://www.texaschlforum.com/viewtopic. ... ue#p309238" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

and here:
http://www.texaschlforum.com/viewtopic. ... ue#p305249" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

and here:
http://www.texaschlforum.com/viewtopic. ... ue#p299752" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[G.A. Heath]

Please people: Google something before you repeat what you read in an EMAIL.

HR45 - Dead, no co-sponsors.
SB2099 - does not exist as a bill before the current congress, somebody made this up.

[The Annoyed Man]

Lord I wish this story would peter out and die the death it deserves.

It's no reflection on you, FL450, but just so you know, this is oooooooooooooooooooooold news, and has been circulating and recirculating around the Internet for years now, and it is a bogus story.

Whenever you get something like this, the very first place you should go to verify it is Snopes.com. Here is what they have to say about this story:

Handgun Safety and Registration Act

Claim: A bill currently before Congress would require that all handgun owners list their guns on federal income tax returns.

FALSE

Example: [Collected via e-mail, May 2009]


Senate Bill SB-2099 will require us to put on our 2009 1040 federal tax form all guns that you have or own. It may require
fingerprints and a tax of $50 per gun.

This bill was introduced on Feb. 24. This bill will become public knowledge 30 days after it is voted into law. This is an amendment to the Internal Revenue Act of 1986. This means that the Finance Committee can pass this without the Senate voting on it at all.

The full text of the proposed amendment is on the U.S. Senate homepage, http://www.senate.gov/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You can find the bill by doing a search by the bill number, SB-2099.

Variations: An August 2009 version of the Handgun Safety and Registration Act e-mail combined it with the Blair Holt e-mail that truthfully claims a bill before Congress would prohibit ownership of handguns by those who have not obtained firearms licenses.

Origins: The item quoted above about a pending Congressional bill requiring gun owners to list their guns on federal income tax is both outdated and contains a good deal of misinformation. The referenced bill, SB 2099 (the Handgun Safety and Registration Act) is not currently before Congress — it was introduced to the Senate back in February 2000 (not 2009), and it was referred to the Committee on Finance, where it languished without ever coming to a vote. It also had no provisions for requiring handgun owners to list their guns on federal income tax returns. {emphasis mine - TAM}

The issue back in 2000 was Senate Bill 2099, introduced in February of that year by Senator Jack Reed, a Democrat from Rhode Island. S. 2099 was titled the "Handgun Safety and Registration Act of 2000" and sought "to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to require the registration of handguns, and for other purposes."

The National Firearms Act of 1934 established (among other things) a tax on both the manufacture and the transfer of firearms, required that each person who transfers a firearm file an application (complete with photograph and fingerprints) with the internal revenue authorities, and authorized the creation of "a central registry of all firearms in the United States which are not in the possession or under the control of the United States." However, the definition of "firearm" used by the 1934 act did not include standard rifles, shotguns, or handguns. It applied only to specialized weapons such as short-barrelled rifles and shotguns, machine guns, silencers, and other "destructive devices" (e.g., grenades, bombs, rockets, missiles, mines). S. 2099 would have expanded the definition of "firearm" to include handguns, thus subjecting them to these requirements as well.

The upshot of the Handgun Safety and Registration Act, if passed, would have been the imposition of a $50 tax on the manufacture of all handguns, a requirement that all gun owners register their handguns within one year of the Act's passage (but not, as claimed, list them on their federal income tax returns), and the provision that registration information be made available to federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies. In practical terms, every handgun owner would have had to obtain a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms registration form and an FBI fingerprint form, then complete and submit both forms (along with a 2x2 of himself and a $5 payment) to the BATF.

That the intent of this bill was to effect nationwide registration of handguns is unmistakable. As stated in a press release about Senator Reed's bill:

The bill would require registration of all handguns, including those currently in private possession, and would make it a felony for any person to transfer a handgun to another individual without prior law enforcement approval. Background checks would be performed on all primary and secondary transfers of handguns, including retail sales, gun shows, Internet sales and all private sales.

The claim that this bill could have been passed into law without Congress voting upon it was not true: The Handgun Safety and Registration Act, like any other Congressional bill, would have had to be passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the President (or passed again over his veto) in order to become law. Furthermore, the $50 tax specified in the bill would have applied only to gun manufacturers, not gun owners.

As noted above, the Handgun Safety and Registration Act of 2000 languished in committee without ever being brought to a vote, and even Senator Reed himself said at the time he submitted the bill that he was not optimistic about its chances of success:

I am under no illusion that this legislation will be approved by this Congress or next Congress ... But we must begin the process to create a law that Americans overwhelmingly believe is necessary.

[Zee]

Its tempting to believe things that validate my viewpoints but that's no reason to allow myself to fed just any old thing.

[The Annoyed Man]

The important thing to remember is that NOTHING that happens in Congress can become law before it either A) passes BOTH houses of Congress and then is signed by the president into law; or B) is vetoed by the president and then re-passed by a 2/3 majority of both the Senate (67 votes) and the House (291 votes) to override the presidential veto. It cannot be withheld from public knowledge. That part is pure bunk.

Such a bill as this one would likely go along party lines, with "conservative" blue dog democrats voting against such restrictions in slightly higher numbers than squishy republicans would vote for it. It would not likely pass — particularly in the current environment in which even many Obama supporters have become concerned about the overarching and overreaching nature of this administration.

That said, that such a bill has not passed yet, nor is likely to pass any time soon, does not mean that we should let our guard down and relax our vigilance against the creeping encroachment into our 2nd Amendment rights.

[dicion]

My mother used to Frequently forward me all kinds of these fake emails.

I started replying back the link to snopes showing them all as false.

After about the 9th or 10th time I did this, She doesn't forward them anymore...
.... at least not to me

[RiverCity.45]

Jeez. It's incredible that this crap is still floating around. More amazing is how may people believe it. In the midst of all the anti-dem hysteria, I guess this stuff is inevitable and easily accepted without question by the less politically astute.

[bdickens]

There's enough real, verifiable threats to our liberty going around to worry about. I wonder how much of this recycling of old, false information is actually disinformation purposely designed to distract from what is really going on.

[dicion]

There's enough real, verifiable threats to our liberty going around to worry about. I wonder how much of this recycling of old, false information is actually disinformation purposely designed to distract from what is really going on.

Yea, seriously...

btw, did you hear that all firing pins will need to be laser engraved so that the primer on each round has a unique registered mark after firing for easy tracing? and if your gun doesn't have this firing pin, then it will have to be upgraded or destroyed? Totally true... really...

[RiverCity.45]

And don't forget the totally true lie that Wally World is to begin registering ammo sales to the buyer....

FYI: If you receive an email that urges you to pass it on to everyone you know, you can just about guarantee that it's a hoax. Never believe these types of email and never get suckered into spamming your contacts with it.

[mctowalot]

Hate to admit it but with the current administration I'm coughing up the hook, line, etc.

[Mike1951]

And don't forget the totally true lie that Wally World is to begin registering ammo sales to the buyer....

FYI: If you receive an email that urges you to pass it on to everyone you know, you can just about guarantee that it's a hoax. Never believe these types of email and never get suckered into spamming your contacts with it.

And it's even more suspect if it claims to have been verified by Snopes. They include this so you won't check for yourself.

Besides http://www.snopes.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; , the other site I use is http://www.truthorfiction.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; .

I almost always reply to the sender, but I won't embarrass the sender by using 'reply all'.

Maybe I should!

[UpTheIrons]

And it's even more suspect if it claims to have been verified by Snopes. They include this so you won't check for yourself.

Besides http://www.snopes.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; , the other site I use is http://www.truthorfiction.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; .

I almost always reply to the sender, but I won't embarrass the sender by using 'reply all'.

Maybe I should!

I did just that (reply all) with this exact email two days ago. The original sender must not have noticed that, because he replied to me asking for info on how I knew it was false, even though it had kernels of truth. I pointed him to the correct Snopes link, as well as to a few other sites that correct falsehoods or help fight the fictions (like this here forum, Gun Rights Radio, Tom Gresham, Oleg Volk's site, etc.)

I got a nice note from him the next day that was copied to everyone else he sent the original to, thanking me for the correct information, and also encouraging all those he sent the note to to look more closely next time too.

I was even nice this time - something I haven't always been when bombarded by this kind of crap.

Thanks for the truthorfiction link - I'll have to look it up!