• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Vermont Gun Plan

dan10mmman

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
26
Location
Des Moines, Washington, USA
imported post

A friend sent this to me today had to share



The most intelligent thing I have read yet. Read it thoroughly and then see if you don't agree with State Rep. Maslack. In short, make the bleeding heart liberals pay for their protection. Best example is the nation of Switzerland . Everyone is given a rifle and military training. They have the lowest crime.
WHAT A GREAT IDEA !!!!!!!!!!!



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 afee 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" bythe government as well as criminals. Vermont 's constitution states explicitly that "the people have a right tobear 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. America

Home of the free,

BECAUSE of the Brave.
 

dan10mmman

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
26
Location
Des Moines, Washington, USA
imported post

Tawnos wrote:
Friends don't let friends forward chain emails, in any form.
I didn't see anything that says to send this on or anything like that. I hate chain e-mail's, if this is one I apologize. I found it interesting and worthy of discussion, nothing more.
Dan
 
Top