Subject: File No. S7-08-09
From: Lawrence Johnson

May 14, 2009

Put simply, by removing the uptick rule, the SEC allowed and allows the price of thinly and moderately stocks to be manipulated for the purposes of triggering stop loss orders as well as many other purposes NOT DIRECTLY RELATED TO MAKING MONEY FROM THE SHORT SALE ITSELF. If the SEC fails to do something about the manipulation, it should be liable to each and every small investor who sold because they got scared or had their stop loss order triggered due to the manipulation.

In a day when large hedge fund owners can sit behind a desk in an office and account for up to 3% of the volume on a particular exchange on a given day, it is critical to have rules in place which protect the small investor. The small investor accounts for lots of the daily volume on the exchanges and the small investor is getting fleeced

What I would like to know is WHY the uptick rule was removed in the first place and an investigation should commence promptly into WHO, WHAT and WHY. I pay lots of attention to this issue, but have yet to hear WHY it was removed, only why it wasn't necessary. BUT WITH THE OFT-MENTIONED LIMITED RESOURCES OF THE SEC, WHY DID THEY SEE IT TO TAKE THE TIME TO CHANGE SOMETHING THAT HAD BEEN AROUND FOR DECADES AND CAUSE SIGNIFICANT CHANGES MADE TO COMPUTER PROGRAMS ETC FOR SOMETHING THAT CERTAINTLY WAS NOT HURTING ANYONE. THIS MUST BE LOOKED INTO. THE MARKET HAS BEEN A DISASTER THE DAY SINCE THE RULE WAS REMOVED. What was the burning desire of the SEC to remove this rule and who was behind it?