Post by: shotguunar on February 05, 2017, 11:04:40 AM
firearm.beings that it is a second amendment right of the people gun owners of washington we need a federal judge to step in
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on February 05, 2017, 11:08:00 AM
Post by: xd2005 on February 05, 2017, 11:14:51 AM
Post by: Stein on February 05, 2017, 11:36:11 AM
Post by: Knocker of rocks on February 05, 2017, 11:38:08 AM
Is it legal for a state to charge you a fee to own a
firearm.beings that it is a second amendment right of the people gun owners of washington we need a federal judge to step in
Unlikely that a fee to exercise a Constitutional right would pass legal muster.
Post by: shotguunar on February 05, 2017, 01:21:11 PM
Post by: Knocker of rocks on February 05, 2017, 01:27:59 PM
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
Post by: KFhunter on February 05, 2017, 01:33:28 PM
FWIW I don't think it would deemed legal even if it passed with a voter initiative.
Post by: Bob33 on February 05, 2017, 01:38:49 PM
You need to pay a fee first to comment. ;)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
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on February 05, 2017, 01:43:42 PM
What guns? :dunno: :bash:
FWIW I don't think it would deemed legal even if it passed with a voter initiative.
:yeah:
How do they know who owns what? Oh yea I-594. :bash:
Post by: Lucky1 on February 05, 2017, 01:45:32 PM
If they pass a initiative we will have to pay some attorney fees to have it be found to be unconstitutional.You need to pay a fee first to comment. ;)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
Post by: pianoman9701 on February 05, 2017, 02:30:23 PM
:yeah: A fee to exercise a right would be unconstitutional.If they pass a initiative we will have to pay some attorney fees to have it be found to be unconstitutional.You need to pay a fee first to comment. ;)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
Post by: Dan-o on February 05, 2017, 03:06:48 PM
And remember: the power to tax is the power to destroy. Those who oppose gun rights will use multiple paths to eat away at our rights.
Post by: Lucky1 on February 05, 2017, 03:21:02 PM
I believe that to be the case as well..... but I am not convinced that it won't happen anyway..... wait a second...... I-594 comes to mind.I agree. They will not give up. But, this last election gives us a opportunity to take back ground we have given up.
And remember: the power to tax is the power to destroy. Those who oppose gun rights will use multiple paths to eat away at our rights.
The Hearing Protection Act is one step.
Seating a conservative on the Supreme Court is another step.
National concealed carry reciprocity done the right way might be a step in the right direction, although doing away with the requirement for a permit altogether is the right step.
Regarding I-594, there have not been any test cases yet that can go to the high courts to determine constitutionality of this bogus law.
Th CCW permit and the associated fees are taxes on exercising our 2A rights.
Post by: ghosthunter on February 05, 2017, 03:34:01 PM
The courts have ruled that reasonable restriction can be applied. There is no contitutional right to own a AR say.
How will they know if you lock your guns up. They won't unless they come to your house or someone gets your gun and kills people. Than you will be a felon and the people will still be dead. It is not a Preventive proposal it is a Punative proposal.
Post by: hunter399 on February 05, 2017, 04:58:51 PM
Post by: JJB11B on February 05, 2017, 06:31:06 PM
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?What guns? :dunno: :bash:
FWIW I don't think it would deemed legal even if it passed with a voter initiative.
:yeah:
How do they know who owns what? Oh yea I-594. :bash:
Post by: Lucky1 on February 05, 2017, 07:19:00 PM
,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?What guns? :dunno: :bash:
FWIW I don't think it would deemed legal even if it passed with a voter initiative.
:yeah:
How do they know who owns what? Oh yea I-594. :bash:
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?
Post by: lokidog on February 05, 2017, 07:44:35 PM
:yeah: 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.
Post by: Blacktail Sniper on February 05, 2017, 07:53:36 PM
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?What guns? :dunno: :bash:
FWIW I don't think it would deemed legal even if it passed with a voter initiative.
:yeah:
How do they know who owns what? Oh yea I-594. :bash:
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
Post by: Knocker of rocks on February 05, 2017, 07:54:59 PM
:yeah: A fee to exercise a right would be unconstitutional.If they pass a initiative we will have to pay some attorney fees to have it be found to be unconstitutional.You need to pay a fee first to comment. ;)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
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.
Post by: Knocker of rocks on February 05, 2017, 08:29:30 PM
]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(?)
Post by: JJB11B on February 05, 2017, 08:31:07 PM
Post by: csaaphill on February 05, 2017, 08:45:26 PM