Tungsten
Ultimate Member
Interesting idea. Hopefully a state institutes a fee for commies to speak. Then force them to obtain insurance to pay for all the damage their sick ideology creates.
Lol, so they want us to pay into a fund to finance those looking to limit our rights more, lol.
Love the hypocrisy of this.
You can't make a fundamental right contingent on a financial transaction.
I'm ready for "the big one" to finally cause CA to fall into the Pacific Ocean.
San Diego just passed a ghost gun ban which, amongst other things, bans "unserialized parts" which could be used in building a ghost gun. So theoretically a Glock 19, since it has an unserialized barrel and slide, falls under that ban. And how do you serialize a spring?
This insurance/fee thing, if it survives, will probably show up in Annapolis in a few years. . .
If they want to go down the road of "nobody should pay for other people's rights" then I'll take a hard right and hit the accelerator.You'd think. But the San Jose Mayor (or maybe it was one of their council members?) basically came out and said that non-gun owners shouldn't have to pay for the costs of gun owner's rights. Thus the insurance requirement so that only gun owners were paying the costs of "gun violence". Used almost exactly that language too!
Oh, wait? So I shouldn't have to pay for anyone else's right to vote? Or free speech?
No more free rides! Someone wants a permit to hold a rally, no more of this nominal fee crap. They pay every cent of the police presence, any clean-up the city has to do, etc. Want to vote? Well time for everyone to pay a poll fee. I am tired of my taxes going to pay to run polling sites, vote counts etc. Want to vote, pony up!
Also want to mention the Gun Case Tracker if you've not seen it. Run by Rob Romano over at the Firearms Policy Coalition. He's a lawsuit tracking wizard. It's embedded on MSI's website.
https://www.marylandshallissue.org/jmain/counselor-s-corner/natl-litigation-trk
You can if you assert rational basis instead of intermediate or strict scrutiny. probably 3/4 of the voters in San Jose will believe the assertion that it is analogous to car insurance.You can't make a fundamental right contingent on a financial transaction.
Could end up proving that law abiding gun owners are not the financial strain on society that anti gun politicians would have us believe. Criminals aren’t going to buy gun insurance? We probably should then require every citizen buy uninsured firearm user coverage too. So when a criminal illegally possess and uses a firearm against an innocent person, the uninsured firearm fund pays….
I've got insurance! Insurance that my firearms are going to stay put and not shoot anything that I don't what them to shoot.