PDA

View Full Version : PAYING FOR YOUR SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS, THE FIREARMS POLL TAX



OldNavyGuy
07-12-09, 09:09
i do not know about you folks, but when i read this article, my blood began to boil over, when you have read it you too should get upset and send your state, county and city officials this article and demand equal and fairness in having the same rights as those voting, education or abortion, they must first pay a fee and be granted a governmental permit conditioned on being "fully qualified".

i for one am so freaking sick and tired of being discriminated against, when our Constitution and Bill of Rights are being shiite canned when we want to exercise those rights, LEGALLY i hate this crap as much as i hate the FACT us dog owners are discriminated against due to licensing, rabies shots etc. when cat owners get a free ride, cats are far worse when it comes to rabies and spreading infectious diseases.., back to our GUN RIGHTS, we as a voting group/block should deny these bureaucRATS their job, vote against them every opportunity you get, send this EtherZone.com article to everyone of your "gun totin" friends, neighbors and relatives, when i was a kid of 12 y.o. i was a free individual, now as a senior citizen i am a slave..., please remember, this all started with, "WE JUST WANT YOU TO STOP SMOKING ON AIRPLANES".., do you make the connection ??

PAYING FOR YOUR SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS
THE FIREARMS POLL TAX

By: Daniel Sargis

One of the most patently absurd and discriminatory Constitutional violations of modern times is the levying of fees by local and state governments for the "granting" of a firearms permit.

It is a modern-day Poll Tax that goes unquestioned and unchallenged by most...including many gun owners.

In fact, the entire firearms permitting process, as it now stands, is a greater denier of Constitutional Rights than the travesty that liberals accused the Poll Tax of creating...intentionally robbing specific population segments of their rights by charging a fee to exercise those rights.

The only difference is that, unlike voting, where there is no federal Constitutional Right to vote (we’ll get around to this in a moment), individual firearms ownership is guaranteed by the Second Amendment.

Recently, after the successful completion of a NRA "Basic Pistol Course", a friend of mine applied for her Local Permit (Temporary State Pistol Permit) which is the first step on the way to obtaining a State Permit to Carry Pistols and Revolvers in Connecticut.

As I read the cover letter from the local Chief of Police that was attached to the Local Permit application, I couldn’t help thinking that (especially in light of the recent allegations of massive voter fraud perpetrated by ACORN et al) either the voter registration standards of this country need to be radically reformed or that America’s gun owners are among the most consistently and severely discriminated against segment of the citizenry in the history of the country.

The Chief’s cover letter starts out reasonably enough, "It is our intention to issue temporary permits to carry a pistol or revolver only to persons fully qualified."

Legal gun owners, as a group, are good people and have little problem agreeing that the responsibility of your gun-owning Right mandates that you be qualified to exercise that Right safely and responsibly.

But let’s turn to three "non-rights" that the liberal cabal have sanctified as "Rights": (1) the Right to vote; (2) the Right to a free public education and (3) the Right to an abortion.

Unlike the Right clearly expressed by the Second Amendment, nowhere in the Constitution or any of its Amendments is there a mention of a Right to either vote, receive a free public education or have an abortion.

Yet, try telling anybody from ACORN, the NEA or Planned Parenthood that in order for any of their client groups to be granted the privilege of exercising their desire for voting, education or abortion they must first pay a fee and be granted a governmental permit conditioned on being "fully qualified"!

Paragraph two of the Chief’s cover letter requests that you, "Fill out completely and accurately the application for the permit," and cautions you that, "Any falsehoods, misrepresentations, or omissions may be cause for rejection of the application."

Imagine yanking the medical license of a late term abortion provider who misrepresents that he performed a late term abortion because, in compliance with Connecticut law (CT General Statute Sec.19a.602 (b)) the procedure was, "...necessary to preserve the life or health of the pregnant woman," and then it turns out that the mother’s health was fine. It never happens.

Or, as Ron Fitzsimmons, head of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, said, "When you're a doctor who does these abortions and the leaders of your movement appear before Congress and go on network news and say these procedures are done in only the most tragic of circumstances, how do you think it makes you feel? You know they're primarily done on healthy women and healthy fetuses, and it makes you feel like a dirty little abortionist with a dirty little secret."

In fact, as far as "falsehoods, misrepresentations, or omissions" are concerned... "The Justice Department has rejected Georgia's system of using Social Security numbers and driver's license data to check whether prospective voters are citizens... the Justice Department said the state's voter verification program...has a ‘discriminatory effect’ on minority voters."

Apparently, there is nothing wrong with "falsehoods, misrepresentations, or omissions" if all you want to do is rig an election.

By paragraph three, the Chief wants the permit applicant to, "Contact three (3) persons (NON RELATIVES) who have known you for some time and ask them to complete the "Character Reference" letters enclosed in this package. All three letters must be notarized."

Additionally, the applicant must submit, "A copy of your birth certificate...along with a letter or certificate attesting to your competence with a handgun...."

Also, "You must come in to be fingerprinted and bring a money order for $19.25 made out to DPS (Connecticut Dept. of Public Safety). Once your prints have been returned from the FBI, this office will notify you. The Chief will review your application and a determination will be made as to your suitability to carry a pistol or revolver. Upon approval, when picking up the Temporary Permit, a personal check or cash payment of $35.00 made out to XYZ PD will be due."

And, in a final coup de gras, the applicant is informed that:

FINGERPRINT HOURS ARE AS FOLLOWS:

TUESDAYS 10:00 A.M. - 11:00 A.M. ONLY

THURSDAYS 2:00 P.M. - 3:00 P.M. ONLY

Out of an entire week, people seeking to exercise their Second Amendment Right have a window of just two hours to complete only a single step of a multi-step and onerous process to exercise that Right.

Could you only imagine subjecting a: (1) voter registrant; (2) public school enrollee 0r (3) a woman seeking an abortion to this kind of restrictive, subjective and costly imposition on the exercise of their "rights"?

Tragically, this is only a part of the process on the obstacle-strewn path of a citizen attempting to exercise the clearly stated Right granted them by the Second Amendment.

Unlike the right to vote, which turns out to be a "right" that is not in the US Constitution, the Right of firearms ownership is undeniable.

Even the liberal Salon Magazine admits that, "The Constitution of 1787 left the issue of federal voting rights entirely to the states, which could disenfranchise their voters more or less as they chose. Today, even though "the right to vote" is by now mentioned five times in the amended Constitution...The Supreme Court restated the point in 2000, in Bush v. Gore. "The individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote...."

Yet, the Right to bear arms is as clear as its single sentence in the Second Amendment, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

And speaking of infringement....

If local government largesse bestows a Local Permit upon the applicant...the journey is only half finished. Next, the Local Permit holder must apply for a State Permit to Carry Pistols and Revolvers.

The State Permitting process requires a trip to one of only six Connecticut Department of Public Safety locations that process firearms permits...and only one of these locations has full time business hours.

Having made it to a DPS location that is open, the applicants will need: (1) their Local Permit; (2) Proof that they are legally and/or lawfully in the United States (Birth Certificate, Voter Registration Card 0r U.S. Passport) and (3) to fill out another application and pay another $35.00.

After having: (1) proved you are a US citizen twice; (2) spent $89.25 plus all kinds of travel expenses; (3) taken a certified training program; (4) solicited three notarized letters of recommendation; (5) your finger prints sent for review by the FBI and filling out multiple forms...if you are lucky...you are granted a 5 year renewable State Permit to Carry Pistols and Revolvers.

At the soonest, this process takes two months but you better budget 4 to 6 months.

And, even then, every five years permit holders must trek back to a DPS firearms unit to present their proof of citizenship (yet again) and $35.00 (yet again) for a five year renewal of their permit to exercise their SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHT.

By contrast, the Secretary of the State of Connecticut makes it clear that, "Today, voter registration can be conducted by virtually anyone, anywhere, at any time. It's that easy."

In fact, all you need for voter registration is, "to provide additional identification (current and valid photo identification, utility bill, bank statement, pay check, government check, or other government document that shows the name and address of the voter).

Let’s get this straight...all you need to register to vote is a "utility bill".

And then you are permanently registered to vote...no questions asked; no proof of citizenship; no fees and no renewal.

No wonder Adolph Hitler was able to kill more people through the use of the ballot box than he ever did with a gun.

A teenager in her 28th week of a pregnancy can decide that she wants to ease her depression by slipping into a prom dress and immediately she has the "right" to an abortion.

An illegal immigrant can decide that she wants to have six children and immediately they have a "right" to a free public education and healthcare.

ACORN can decide that they want to swing an election and immediately thousands of nonexistent or dead people have a "right" to vote.

But, when law-abiding citizens want to exercise their real Second Amendment Right...they must run an arbitrary and burdensome gauntlet of fees, forms, courses, delays and renewals.

If this isn’t a major Civil Rights lawsuit waiting to happen then we don’t deserve the Second Amendment.



"Published originally at EtherZone.com : republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact http://etherzone.com/2009/sarg070309.shtml

HES
07-12-09, 21:12
Great, so who wants to be the test case and who is gonna bank roll it? I bet $50 that it wont be the NRA

OldNavyGuy
07-13-09, 10:22
I WILL ! if the 230 lookie loo's will back me with a $1,000.00 contribution, i find it hard to believe that there are 230 people clicked on this topic and only you have left a comment, and you are so right about the big mouth no guts/backbone NRA cowards (my OPINION !!) who has compromised away so many of our rights it is pitiful.., e.g., FULL AUTO WEAPONS.., need i say more ?

come on folks just respond with a simple "I WILL, or I HAVE DONE IT.., sent it on to someone else.

i believe the members of this forum have the collective power to make the politicians/bureaucrats pay attention what say y'll ??

pacifico
07-13-09, 11:05
Have you read Nordyke vs King, Pena vs Cid, McDonald vs Chicago or NRA vs Chicago? The groundwork is being laid for challenges to burdensome state laws.

R1pper
07-13-09, 17:35
If you think all this stuiff in CT is bad, you should take a look at the MA system. At least CT does not put restrictions on what type of handguns you can purchase. All handguns in MA must meet the AG's "special requirements" and be "approved" for sale to the general public. Although CT does live under a state AWB it is still not as bad as MA. In MA you cant have any "hi-cap" mags post 94, while in CT there is no hi cap ban and also in CT you can purchase suppressors where as in MA that is a no go.

The permit system is a joke in this state as well. Towns are allowed to "restrict" your usage as in "hunting or target only", "personal protection" or the rare "all lawfull purposes" (only rare in the larger cities, I live in the burbs and got an ALP no problems). Some towns go as far as wanting to have an interview with you before issuing the permit. The final decison is up to the topwn you reside in and can restrict with out any perticular reason. The State has also set the fee at $100 every five years, and it can take as much as three to four months to recieve an approval or denial. Also if the state denies you, your lose the $100.

There are many more things that are invloved with this state gun and permiting laws but I will not waste your time. Also we have a wonderful new proposed law that is some how supposed to stop the "illegal trafficking and sales" by restricting law abiding owners to only one purchase a month, and no private transfers.

http://www.goal.org/templates/govsummary.htm

-DM-

The_War_Wagon
07-13-09, 18:15
Vote with your feet. That way, whe the flag goes up, we'll KNOW which states are nothing more than sheeple pens... :mad:

FMF_Doc
07-14-09, 02:37
The only checks I had to go through was to pay the state licensing fee, and pass a criminal background check to get CHL. None of which is unreasonable.

I didn't have to get permission to own the guns from anyone, I can buy as many as I want without any permits or licenses.

But to carry it in public, concealed they want to run a background check (make sure you pay your child support, etc.) and make sure you can hit what you are aiming at, again not unreasonable.

Once the Chicago case is heard this will change a lot of state/local stupidity.

However I live in one of the Brady F- states so it's all good here.

If you live in a state that has stupid laws it's because your neighbors voted for the idiots that enacted them, therefore they approve of the way things are.
Why continue to live where you are oppressed?

Open a US map, South is down, we like guns here.

jaydoc1
07-14-09, 09:32
Open a US map, South is down, we like guns here.

That's classic. :D

A-Bear680
07-14-09, 10:31
Here's a US map:

www.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rtc.gif

Shall Issue CCW laws seem to have done OK over the years , Vermont Carry -- not so much.