constitutional rights and charging a fee to own a firearm?

[hunter399]

I will not pay a fee,buy a licence, or register my guns or mags ever.To practice my constitutional rights.Ferguson and inslee worry more about the constitutional rights of people that don't even live here yet or making sure our president follows the constitution, But can't even follow the constitution themself,make me sick,biggest joke I have ever seen,not proud of washington state at all.

[JJB11B]

What guns?     

FWIW I don't think it would deemed legal even if it passed with a voter initiative.

 

How do they know who owns what? Oh yea I-594.

what if I took all the guns I had to a range in Idaho to go shootingand wound up selling them while I was there?

[Lucky1]

What guns?     

FWIW I don't think it would deemed legal even if it passed with a voter initiative.

 

How do they know who owns what? Oh yea I-594.

what if I took all the guns I had to a range in Idaho to go shootingand wound up selling them while I was there?

,
The I-594 database is illegal and incomplete. It is a futile attempt to know where the guns are and who has them. That is so they can come take them away some day.
These guys are either stupid or naive or disingenuous or all three. There are guns everywhere that they have no record of and never will. Many people make their own guns.
Whenever they start making noise about regulating guns more, there is a huge surge in sales of guns. Do they think that people are buying them so they can turn them in later?

[lokidog]

  A fee to exercise a right would be unconstitutional.

CA is going to have to, not directly but by having to pay for a permit to buy ammo.

[Blacktail Sniper]

What guns?     

FWIW I don't think it would deemed legal even if it passed with a voter initiative.

 

How do they know who owns what? Oh yea I-594.

what if I took all the guns I had to a range in Idaho to go shootingand wound up selling them while I was there?

That would be in violation of Federal Law unless it is to or through an FFL, and I do not believe that is a new law, I believe it has been that way for awhile.

#2 in the link:   https://www.atf.gov/file/61721/download

[Knocker of rocks]

I no it will eventually pass on A iniitiative what I am saying if they want it they fund it.I see a lot of constitutional fees ready to be charged to the protesters in the streets promoting their rights to free speech. From what I am seeing its legal to throw rocks,bottles, and burn cars buildings and what ever gets in their way we might as well charge them for their right to free speech. Why don't we charge for every right we have left probably pay off the national dept in no time

I'd comment if I could make sense of this

You need to pay a fee first to comment.

If they pass a initiative we will have to pay some attorney fees to have it be found to be unconstitutional.

A fee to exercise a right would be unconstitutional.

Firstly, congrats to your  NE Pats. That was an impressive comback.

I think what Lucky was saying is that if passed, somebody (probably sportsmen and supporteers of the 2nd Admendment) would have to pony up the legal expenses to fight it.

[Knocker of rocks]

]what if I took all the guns I had to a range in Idaho to go shootingand wound up selling them while I was there?

That would be in violation of Federal Law unless it is to or through an FFL, and I do not believe that is a new law, I believe it has been that way for awhile.

I think that goes all the way back to the original 1968 law, effective 1986(?)

[JJB11B]

All my guns were destroyed in a fire

[csaaphill]

I think too what he 's asking or may be getting at is they may try to force some other crap like mandatory ins or something like car ins maybe I'd say F that up and until they say you no longer have a 4th amendment right that is.