Tax the NON-gun-owners!!!

[BigJohn]

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 bastards."

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.

Get this in front of all your elected senators and reps...NOW!

This is from March 2000. It is somewhat dated but I believe what he said then is still a viable option today.

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?...t_to_bear_arms

 

[BigJohn]

I've done my due diligence and I can find no original source for this information so I'm not going to give it any credibility at this time. This is why I constantly ask for links when information is posted. False info even if it is positive will do our cause no favors.

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?...t_to_bear_arms

Here is the link. It is from an article dated March 27, 2000.

I have now answered you twice. I knew that I had replied to someone but forgot that it was you. Anyway now you can look at the article.

 

[sillyrabbit]

GGRRRRRREAT idea, think about it....

Bet their would be a lot of guns purchased!

The taxes collected for those not participating would pay for the police responses!

I mean the BG's would find out who doesn't have guns (by checking the tax roles-public info), target them and their belongings..., the police would respond and the $500 pays for law enforcement actions.

The rest of the people, the ones with guns..... (ie; names not on tax roles) will protect their own and police not needed! Case closed

And, with all the guns owned...crime would fall drastically! stats prove that over and over again! So for those without guns would actually have greater police "protection" than they do presently!

But I agree with another poster here, only those old enough or young enough to be in a "civilian militia" would have to buy guns or pay the taxes INCLUDING ALL political figures, employees, volunteers, community organizers and the like!!!.

Of course they would have to run the program different than the welfare program is run, or medicare, or unemployment or..... or otherwise they'd hear: "eberbuddy here in dis house be to 2 week and frajile to pticipate' in one does der militias, just give us aur welfare checks and stand by da door to potect us ya here? we be to tared!

Just a little humoor guys!

 

[Trlsmn]

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?...t_to_bear_arms

Here is the link. It is from an article dated March 27, 2000.

I have now answered you twice. I knew that I had replied to someone but forgot that it was you. Anyway now you can look at the article.

Link no worky.......... And I'm guessing it would just be a repost of the same internet rumor anyway. I'm looking for a credible source like maybe Rep Fred Maslack own page maybe a mainstream new source. BUt if it was a bill there would be a bill number which seams to be lacking.

 

[bcp]

Maslack is not currently a Vermont representative. He was years ago.

<broken link removed>

Bruce

 

[CEF1959]

Gotta love the "information" available on the internet. It never lets you down.