Now here's a new and interesting point of view...
David Moffitt
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.
Boston Blackie
I thought you guys maintained that the first part of the Amendment -
that nonsense about a militia - was a non-starter and meant nothing.
Make up your fucking mind, Muffy.
--
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in
moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral
justification for selfishness.
-John Kenneth Galbraith
MrWonderful
>
> - Show quoted text -
Silly boy - what mind~!? : ) Lala
MrWonderful
> On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:31:11 -0500, "David Moffitt"
>
> <Nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >bullshit
>
> � It is interesting that oafs like Muffy eat this stuff up. �
>
> � Anyone want to bother trying to check the truth of any of that crap?
zzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzz
: ) Lala
David Moffitt
"Boston Blackie" <bbla...@mail.com> wrote in message
news:hc807o$psu$1...@adenine.netfront.net...
I see you still suffer from poor reading comprehension.
"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.""
> --
David Moffitt
"JG" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:1b3fe5tljuju7vg8s...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:31:11 -0500, "David Moffitt"
> <Nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>>bullshit
>
> It is interesting that oafs like Muffy eat this stuff up.
>
> Anyone want to bother trying to check the truth of any of that crap?
Sure thing cupcake:
http://theamericanheritageproject.wordpress.com/2009/10/27/rep-fred-maslack-good/#comments
http://www.resistnet.com/profiles/blogs/a-novel-idea-register-nongun
Vic
> 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
David,
You are out of your league here. The low crime rate in Vermont has very
little connection to their lax gun laws. While you are at it, tell us
the 2 states that have a lower crime rate than VT.
--
Max tBC
totfit
wrote:
Yep, one of the most asanine analysis I have heard. Fits right at the
bottom of stuff from Fox News. Probably has more to do with a general
population that is well educated and has wayyyyy different attitudes
than Mr. Moffitt.
Boston Blackie
http://www.resistnet.com/profiles/blogs/a-novel-idea-register-nongun
Not
>
that one, Muffin, the other one you dragged to the doorstep like a cat
with a dead bird.
David Moffitt
"Vic" <cal...@nyetspamatt.net> wrote in message
news:hc8d8...@news7.newsguy.com...
I'm just quoting the article.