It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bill introduced in Vermont : 500$ fee for non-gun owners

page: 1
48
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+44 more 
posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 05:15 PM
link   
Nice.

Source

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 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. “

Give this guy a medal.


Nice going Vermont! This will surely drives criminals out of Vermont... they'll move to more nice neighborhoods, like New York.




posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 05:19 PM
link   
:u p:



well it's about godamn time!!!!!



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 05:19 PM
link   
Thats stupid. And why you feel the need to bash New York at the end I don't know. Its the safest place I have ever lived.



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


This is an email that's been circulating since the early 2000s. Fred Maslack hasn't been a Vermont State Rep. since 2004. A shame really, I would love to see that passed.

Link to reprint of original article in Boston Globe, circa 2000.
edit on 6-8-2011 by survivalstation because: added link



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


i am failing to see the logic of making people who dont own guns pay a 500 tax. the state of bernie sanders

says it all.

i am speechless on this one



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by survivalstation
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


This is an email that's been circulating since the early 2000s. Fred Maslack hasn't been a Vermont State Rep. since 2004. A shame really, I would love to see that passed.

Ah thanks for the precision... yeah I hadn't check any facts, I just posted that here... even if it isn't a real bill, it's still an awesome idea.



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 05:26 PM
link   
Personally...

I oppose this bill... I find $500.00 for the privilege of being unarmed far to little... I think that the price for not doing their "part" in the "militia" should be much higher... And perhaps of an annual nature...

My two well placed shots...




posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 05:27 PM
link   
I am all fr gun rights, have my CPL etc. but this is one of the dumbest things I have ever heard. Fining people for not owning guns is ridiculous. To me it's the same as charging someone $500 to own a gun in a liberal state.



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 05:30 PM
link   
The Price Of Freedom

I'm all for civil rights, including gun ownership and self-defense, but this seems overreaching.

What next? A fee for not exercising the right of free speech, free religion, or refusing to quarter troops in your home?

I suggest a little more temperance in such matters.


+4 more 
posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by JustinSee
Thats stupid. And why you feel the need to bash New York at the end I don't know. Its the safest place I have ever lived.


New York: Violent Crime = 4.03/1000. Property Crime = 20.16/1000
Chances of becoming a victim (violent): 1 in 248
Crimes per square mile: 166

Vermont: Violent Crime = 1.35/1000. Property crime = 25.21/1000
Chances of becoming a victim (violent): 1 in 741
Crimes per square mile: 1

Source



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


All the republicans are surely reading this thread and praising the idea of government mandating that they buy guns.

I bet you all raged over the idea of the government mandating that you buy health insurance (Not stating that as a good idea)

The hypocrisy.

If the government knows who doesn't have a gun, then they know who does.



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Majic
The Price Of Freedom

I'm all for civil rights, including gun ownership and self-defense, but this seems overreaching.

What next? A fee for not exercising the right of free speech, free religion, or refusing to quarter troops in your home?

I suggest a little more temperance in such matters.

I wouldn't mind a fee for those who don't vote. Maybe that would force people to create third parties...

A fee for not being armed... pays for the additional police the city/state needs to hire to protect you from others... if everyone is armed, you need a whole less cops.
edit on 6-8-2011 by Vitchilo because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 05:35 PM
link   
More Stupidity coming from idiots. And anyone that thinks you should have to own a gun really is as far out there as you can get. Don`t get me wrong I believe it is your right but not required and certainly not punishable not to own one.

I don`t see this doing anything for crime as mentioned either. Might get some even killed. Say I am a criminal at heart and like guns but I only have a 22. Hey that guy has a nice 45 on him. Pop in the back of the head and now I have a 45 and that individual thought he was safe carrying that 45 but it is worth more then the chump change people have been killed for already.

I`m thinking anyone trying to get such a thing passed must own a gun shop.



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Miraj

I bet you all raged over the idea of the government mandating that you buy health insurance (Not stating that as a good idea)

The hypocrisy.




If I could pay a one time fee of under $500 to buy a lifetime of health coverage
I would have been all for it.

Oh, the lack of comprehension.


David Grouchy



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 05:36 PM
link   
whats the crime rate for legal gun owning law abiding citizens?

careful trick question



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 05:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Domo1
I am all fr gun rights, have my CPL etc. but this is one of the dumbest things I have ever heard. Fining people for not owning guns is ridiculous. To me it's the same as charging someone $500 to own a gun in a liberal state.


It's been done already...


Kennesaw's law was a response to Morton Grove, Illinois, which had passed a gun ban earlier that year as a step to reduce crime.

But it also was an affirmation of what gun advocates say is a blanket U.S. constitutional right, under the Second Amendment, for citizens to keep and bear arms. Gun opponents challenge that right and say the language in the Constitution is open to interpretation.

The Kennesaw law has endured as the town's population has swelled to about 30,000 from 5,000 in 1982.

"When the law was passed in 1982 there was a substantial drop in crime ... and we have maintained a really low crime rate since then," said police Lt. Craig Graydon. "We are sure it is one of the lowest (crime) towns in the metro area.


www.reuters.com...

Seems to work just fine...



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 05:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


i am failing to see the logic of making people who dont own guns pay a 500 tax. the state of bernie sanders

says it all.

i am speechless on this one

OFF THE CUFF:
Perhaps:

A decent firearm can cost around $500; if bearing arms is a citizens' civic duty( obligation); those who choose to sleep under the protection provided by their neighbors should some how make good on that ( $500.00) obligation levied on their more "duty-conscience" neighbors.
?No?

Or perhaps it is just to reinforce the sarcasm of being fined( fees) for legally purchasing and owning inmore liberal states?
edit on 6-8-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by schuyler
 


Whats your point? New York isn't as bad as all the media and movies would have you believe, and its only certain sections of the city at that. Its not full of gangs and gangwars. And there is alot more people here than in Vermont, living close together. Koch and Guliani "cleaned up" the city a long time ago- to such an extent- that its actually boring. For a major metropolitan city where crime is expected- New York is pretty safe.
These types of threads and/or funny gun owner humor just make gun enthusiasts look stupid.

Edit: and you can't charge people for not wanting to blow someone away, however you want to look at it.
edit on 6-8-2011 by JustinSee because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 05:41 PM
link   
reply to post by 46ACE
 


pretty sure the elderly and children cant and shouldnt have to be obliged to

now if every citizen was required by state law to pay that tax then well thats messed up.



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 05:42 PM
link   
Hell yeah.

Shout out to my boys in the 802, I'll be back in 2 weeks.




top topics



 
48
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join