Defensive Carry banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
369 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
You guys may have seen this, and I apologize if its posted already, but this was too good not to share. (do you see a relationship to the argument in the health care debate here :22a:)

Finally .... A Sensible Gun Registration Plan That Will Work
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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

"America is at that awkward stage.

It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the ********."

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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
335 Posts
I can't imagine this ever passing but it should make for some interesting debate.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
86 Posts
That is very interesting reading. I wonder if Vermont's third-lowest crime rating is per capita...?

IMO this is somewhat analogous to Kennesaw, Georgia, where firearms have been required in homes since circa 1982... and the crime rate there TANKED after its enactment.

I would love to see this bill become law, even though I do not live in Vermont- it would set a good precedent in my opinion.

Just my opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,271 Posts
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.
Although I certainly smile at the idea and I understand the reasoning behind it, the end result (if this ever passed, which it won't) would be flawed. Here's the problem: it's a de facto gun registry. The only way to be exempt from paying this fee is to prove you own a gun. In an effort to keep multiple households from fraudulently claiming the same gun, you'll have to also provide a unique and verifiable serial number for the weapon you're claiming.

I enjoy the irony of the idea. But the bottom line is that the gov has no business knowing whether a citizen owns a firearm OR NOT.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
369 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
I enjoy the irony of the idea. But the bottom line is that the gov has no business knowing whether a citizen owns a firearm OR NOT.
I agree with you 100%, but me thinks this was a tongue-in-cheek remark, and i have a feeling it was in reference to the "everyone must pay into the health care system in order for it to work" idea being floated by the democrats.

JMHO......:wave:
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
50,603 Posts
Shouldn't they also post the names and addresses of those who do not want to have a gun in the home?:image035::yup::danceban::danceban:

That's what I'm talkin' about.:bier:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,038 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
86 Posts
I found a similar proposal dated 2000 on the 'net about an hour ago by a Fred Maslack; Maybe some non-Y2K-compliant stuff is rearing its head almost ten years late. Never too late for this kind of law, though, I hope...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
369 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Anyone check the source?

I just check The Vermont Legislature and found no Fred Maslack
No, I didnt check the source. It was emailed to me, but I posted it for the "spirit" of the letter. Real, hoax, either way its heading in an interesting direction. While I dont like the idea of anyone, let alone the government, in my business, I like the premise of everyone who is eligible to own a firearm to own one. Activist judges who can usurp the constitiution with judicial activism scare me to death. :ahhhhh:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
369 Posts
Discussion Starter #13

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,038 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,915 Posts
Oh well ......we can dream about it:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
399 Posts
I don't think I would like this sort of law anyways - as jumpwing said, it's a defacto gun registry. If you want to know who owns guns, just get the list of people who don't, then look at everyone else.

I'd rather they just stay out of it entirely.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,355 Posts
All non gun households ought to post a yard sign to that effect.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,038 Posts
I don't think I would like this sort of law anyways - as jumpwing said, it's a defacto gun registry. If you want to know who owns guns, just get the list of people who don't, then look at everyone else.

I'd rather they just stay out of it entirely.
↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ :yup: ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ :yup: ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ :yup: ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ :yup: ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ :yup: ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑

Absolutely!

They won't have to have all the individual guns registered, but....

Won't be a big deal with me, as I very well "marked" already, between letters-to-the-editor, VCDL lobby day, the Freedom Rally pictures by DHS, Tea Parties, OC on VT campus, etc.

However, this would likely be a slippery slope we should stay off of -- albeit I like the intent of the idea.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top