REGISTER NON-GUN-OWNERS

A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE...

 

IF YOU ARE A RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNER

 THIS MAY MAKE YOUR DAY!

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. 

Vermont would become  the first state to require a permit for the luxury of going about  unarmed and charge $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.."
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. Sounds reasonable to me! Non-gun owners require more police to protect them and this fee should go to paying for their defense!

I LIKE IT!  LJK.