Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts


Go Back   Vanguard News Network Forum > News & Discussion > This Just In
Donate Register Multimedia Blogs Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Login

 
 
Thread Display Modes Share
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old February 17th, 2011 #1
-JC
Doesn't suffer fools well
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,740
Default VT rep. proposed a bill to register "non-gun-owners" and require them to pay a $500 fee...

Vermont State Rep. Fred Maslack has read the Second Amendment tothe 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 wouldbecome 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 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" bythe 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.

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.


Non-gun owners require more police to protectthem and this fee should go to paying for their defense!
 
 

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:29 AM.
Page generated in 0.18930 seconds.