shopify analytics ecommerce
ASD - A $500.00 Fee For NOT Owning A Gun? - The Original American Sheepdog!
Click Me
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 19

Thread: A $500.00 Fee For NOT Owning A Gun?

  1. #1
    ASD Senior Member dnola's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Central US
    Posts
    900
    Thanked: 268
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default A $500.00 Fee For NOT Owning A Gun?

    This was included in a recently received e-mail. Though its authenticity has not been established, it is a proposal that makes some sense even though it is very unlikely to ever see the light of day. As with all legislative efforts, there are pros and cons. Let's face it. Not everyone should own a gun!

    Vermont State Rep. Fred Maslack has read the Second Amendment to the
    U.S.Constitution, as well as Vermont's own Constitution very carefully, and
    his strict interpretation of these documents is popping some eyeballs in New
    England and elsewhere.

    Maslack recently proposed a bill to register "non-gun-owners" and require
    them to pay a $500 fee to the state. Thus Vermont would become the first
    state to require a permit for the luxury of going about unarmed and assess a
    fee of $500 for the privilege of not owning a gun.

    Maslack read the "militia" phrase of the Second Amendment as not only
    affirming the right of the individual citizen to bear arms, but as a clear
    mandate to do so. He believes that universal gun ownership was advocated by
    the Framers of the Constitution as an antidote to a "monopoly of force" by
    the government as well as criminals. Vermont 's constitution states
    explicitly that "the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of
    themselves and the State" and those persons who are "conscientiously
    scrupulous of bearing arms" shall be required to "pay such equivalent."

    Clearly, says Maslack, Vermonters have a constitutional obligation to arm
    themselves, so that they are capable of responding to "any situation that
    may arise."

    Under the bill, adults who choose not to own a firearm would be required to
    register their name, address, Social Security Number, and driver's license
    number with the state. "There is a legitimate government interest in
    knowing who is not prepared to defend the state should they be asked to do
    so," Maslack says. Vermont already boasts a high rate of gun ownership
    along with the least restrictive laws of any state .. it's currently the
    only state that allows a citizen to carry a concealed firearm without a
    permit. This combination of plenty of guns and few laws regulating them has
    resulted in a crime rate that is the third lowest in the nation.

    This makes sense! There is no reason why gun owners should have to pay
    taxes to support police protection for people not wanting to own guns. Let
    them contribute their fair share and pay their own way.

    There is little question that the crime rate in Vermont would tumble if such a law were passed and there would be a lot of scumbags renting U-Hauls to find a better place to ply their trade... possibly I could suggest NYC or NJ!
    If Obama is the answer, the question must have been really stupid!
    Official Certification: This is to warrant that the above post contains a minimum of 90% recycled words.

  2. #2
    ASD Senior Member texengineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    I currently live in Tucson, AZ
    Posts
    658
    Thanked: 68

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dnola View Post
    .. it's currently the only state that allows a citizen to carry a concealed firearm without a permit.
    I'm pretty sure that Alaska doesn't require a permit, and hopefully sometime this week Arizona won't either!! *CROSSES FINGERS* It's definitely the way to go. We have a lot of gang violence here in Arizona cities. Notice..."in cities"... The rural areas have cowboy tendencies, people carrying concealed or open or both all the time. Crime in Cave Creek (where most of the houses worth robbing are located) is VERY low...people either walk around in Stetsons and boots with a pistol on their hip, or in business suits with a hidden surprise. People there are SOOO polite too :) I love it.

    As far as the thread goes...I don't quite agree with forcing people to own a gun or pay a fee. Freedom is what we're trying to protect. Forcing people in the other direction would still be inhibiting freedom. Vermont is setting a GREAT example with their extremely relaxed (and logical) laws that are having an Amazing effect on the state's safety record.
    ASD's Official Spam Looker-Outer-Dude (OSLOD)

    "[A]rms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. . . Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them." - Thomas Paine




  3. #3
    ASD Senior Member
    mmszbi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas
    Posts
    800
    Thanked: 163

    Default

    Even tho Alaska did away with the requirement to have a permit, I still got one. No background check required to purchase a gun that way. Also, it you want to carry concealed in the cities (Anchorage, Fairbanks, Wasilla, Juneau, etc) a permit is still required, or was before I left. Things might have changed.

    I think a $500 fine would be fine. I don't see it as forcing anyone to do anything, you have a CHOICE of paying or owning...pretty simple.
    HUG YOUR KIDS EVERY DAY AND TELL THEM YOU LOVE THEM
    R.I.P. Zachary, 6/19/95-10/25/12

  4. #4
    ASD Senior Member JavamanX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South East Tennessee
    Posts
    295
    Thanked: 29

    Siren

    Playing Devils advocate here but........

    Remember when the government said that you HAD to get health insurance or pay a fine... Remember how angry it made you? Now.... Think about it a bit more.

    I understand the concept burried under the shock value of this however, it would be tantamount to the government MAKING you own a weapon or pay a fine.

    Now take Person X and their case

    Person X had no gun experience, is not comforatable around guns, and is strapped for cash. Person X, instead of spending 500 dollars to pay the fine, goes out and buys a cheap gun for 250-300. Now you have a gun, in someones hands, who does not feel comfortable with it, they may have bought ammo for it, or maybe they didnt...

    Now.... What has been achieved here?

    We have a cheap gun, in a home of someone who doesnt know anything about it, puts it in a closet and forgets about it. Maybe Person X got the gun and ammo, loaded it because hey... isnt that what you are supposed to do?, and THEN stashed it away.

    Remember Person X is not a "Gun Person" and thus does not think like we do. So now we have a loaded, unsecured weapon, lost in the house. Can anyone say household urban boobytrapp/landmine? As we all know, kids find the darndest things when left to their own devices......

    I await your repsonses.
    Fortes Fortuna Adjuvat

    Fortune Favors the Brave


  5. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to JavamanX For This Useful Post:

    mmszbi (04-15-2010), rkbartley (04-14-2010)

  6. #5
    Administrator

    rkbartley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Central Texas
    Posts
    2,612
    Thanked: 457

    Default

    Good thought Java. We've missed you!

    rkb
    rkb


    Member:

    NRA
    TSRA
    TCHA
    USCCA
    OES, PM #316

    "The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms." - Samual Adams
    "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."- Thomas Jefferson

  7. #6
    ASD Senior Member Rossi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Missouri/Kansas Border
    Posts
    1,801
    Thanked: 269
    Blog Entries
    6

    Default

    Ha! I'm late. J-man made my point. Substitute health care instead of firearm and you have the basis for the law suit dealing with ObamaCare. It's unconstitutional to make people buy some commercial product just to continue being an American citizen. (Well, for now, all subject to change of course. That pesky Constitution keeps getting in b.o.'s way.)

    Rossi

  8. #7
    ASD Senior Member
    mmszbi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas
    Posts
    800
    Thanked: 163

    Default

    Once again, I didn't think it all the way through....I am just going to shut up now....
    HUG YOUR KIDS EVERY DAY AND TELL THEM YOU LOVE THEM
    R.I.P. Zachary, 6/19/95-10/25/12

  9. #8

    Default

    I agree with the concept linking it to the requirement to pay for healthcare. That being said, just having it out there as an idea that you would have to pay a fine NOT to own a gun might get a couple of the pro-Obummercare crowd thinking. Note it may just be a couple........wait, they don't think do they? They ride on emotion without any cerebral activity. Sorry, I forgot.
    Human beings understand and respect compassion, kindness, empathy, truth, fairness and logic.
    Predators respect strength

  10. #9
    ASD Senior Member Decline's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    1,641
    Thanked: 378

    Default

    How about a $500 tax rebate if you own a gun?

  11. #10
    Administrator

    rkbartley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Central Texas
    Posts
    2,612
    Thanked: 457

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Decline View Post
    How about a $500 tax rebate if you own a gun?
    Now I could go for that!

    rkb
    rkb


    Member:

    NRA
    TSRA
    TCHA
    USCCA
    OES, PM #316

    "The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms." - Samual Adams
    "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."- Thomas Jefferson

Similar Threads

  1. India: Civilians get a shot at owning prohibited guns
    By Newt in forum NRA-ILA Current Legislation - Auto Feed
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-14-2010, 10:30 AM
  2. Bad driver? In debt? Proposed NYC law would ban you from owning a gun
    By Newt in forum NRA-ILA Current Legislation - Auto Feed
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-27-2010, 12:30 PM
  3. Florida: Owning a gun not a factor in whether you can adopt
    By Newt in forum NRA-ILA Current Legislation - Auto Feed
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-22-2009, 09:53 AM
  4. Kenya: Owning a semi-auto rifle soon to be a hanging offense
    By Newt in forum NRA-ILA Current Legislation - Auto Feed
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-07-2009, 09:49 AM
  5. Does owning a gun make you safer?
    By UGA in forum Member Contributed News
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-21-2009, 07:20 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Important Site Information