Defensive Carry banner

1 - 4 of 4 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
894 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
When it comes to guns, looks like Vermont has more real cowboys than Arizona.

Finally, A Sensible Gun Registration Plan


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 "conscientiously avoid 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 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.

**************************************************

I may just move to Vermont :rofl:
__________________
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,858 Posts
That would be a kick in the teeth for the anti's. I can see them writing that check for $500.00.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,327 Posts
Okay, this happened back in 2000. The plan was NOT Constitutional and did not pass. Maslack isn't even a representative anymore.

Registering non-gun owners is NOT gun registration. I don't know what moron entitled the viral spam mail as such, but they don't seem to understand the difference.

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.
Yeah, right. So Maine with its crappy gun laws has led to it having even less violent crime and less property crime than Vermont in 2008? In fact, several states with much worse gun laws have lower property crime rates than Vermont.
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2008/data/table_04.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
894 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Okay, this happened back in 2000. The plan was NOT Constitutional and did not pass. Maslack isn't even a representative anymore.

Registering non-gun owners is NOT gun registration. I don't know what moron entitled the viral spam mail as such, but they don't seem to understand the difference.



Yeah, right. So Maine with its crappy gun laws has led to it having even less violent crime and less property crime than Vermont in 2008? In fact, several states with much worse gun laws have lower property crime rates than Vermont.
Table 4 - Crime in the United States 2008


darn-it,, I knew this was to good to be true, I even checked on snopes, but they didn't have anything on this..........<bummer>
 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
Top