1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

must arm yourself

Discussion in 'Shooting Related Threads' started by hreinke, Nov 2, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. hreinke

    hreinke TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    177
    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 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.

    "I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." -- James Madison How's that Big Puppy and Paladin?
     
  2. Jennifer

    Jennifer Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    463
    I did some searching on Vermont's legislative website and could not find a Fred Maslack as a state rep. or senator. Maybe he did exist, but he's completed his term already. I would like to find out if this is another urban legend or not. If anybody can find anything concrete on this I'd sure like to know. I am one of those who agrees with the tenets of this story.

    There IS some fact in the story. This is in Vermont's Constitution:

    Article 9. [Citizens' rights and duties in the state; bearing arms; taxation]

    That every member of society hath a right to be protected in the enjoyment of life, liberty, and property, and therefore is bound to contribute the member's proportion towards the expence of that protection, and yield personal service, when necessary, or an equivalent thereto, but no part of any person's property can be justly taken, or applied to public uses, without the person's own consent, or that of the Representative Body, nor can any person who is conscientiously scrupulous of bearing arms, be justly compelled thereto, if such person will pay such equivalent; nor are the people bound by any law but such as they have in like manner assented to, for their common good: and previous to any law being made to raise a tax, the purpose for which it is to be raised ought to appear evident to the Legislature to be of more service to community than the money would be if not collected.

    Article 16. [Right to bear arms; standing armies; military power subordinate to civil]

    That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State--and as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power.

    Jennifer
     
  3. wayneo

    wayneo Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,002
    Fred proposed this in March 2000. Google Fred Maslack, you can read all about it. Wayne
     
  4. Jennifer

    Jennifer Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    463
    When I googled Fred Maslack, the only thing that came up was the story (above) which didn't have a date, a newspaper or reporter's name, etc. so that's what made me suspicious. I like what he tried to do though.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.