NY Judge rules that you only have constitutional rights if you're rich

[pcgeek11]

The two are not equal. Voting is a privilege, owning a gun is a right.

 

[NeoV]

since when is $113 dollars a year that unreasonable a fee to own a gun?

Let's spruce it up some more and say its more than A THOUSAND DOLLARS and then put 'every 10 years' in really tiny print to stress how unreasonable this fee is?

Any fee, limit, or process that takes more than 2 words to describe, and the gun fanbois are up in arms...keep on sending your money to the NRA though - that's money well spent....

 

[LTC8K6]

You know that NYC has quite low crime and murder rates as compared to other large cities, right?

The rates are okay, but crime is still common.

It may be getting much worse.

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2011/08...ise-staggering-statistics-recorded-city-wide/

 

[the DRIZZLE]

So its unconstitutional to require someone to have a government issued ID to vote (even if its free) but its OK to require them to pay $340 every 3 years to have a gun? I'm glad we have this all sorted out.

IMO there should be no charge at all to exercise your basic rights. If the government thinks that the public interest is served by putting administrative hurtles in your way (such as requiring an ID to vote or a gun permit) then the public can pay for said hurtles. However, I have no problem with charging for things like toll roads which are services provided by the government.

 

[the DRIZZLE]

since when is $113 dollars a year that unreasonable a fee to own a gun?

Let's spruce it up some more and say its more than A THOUSAND DOLLARS and then put 'every 10 years' in really tiny print to stress how unreasonable this fee is?

Any fee, limit, or process that takes more than 2 words to describe, and the gun fanbois are up in arms...keep on sending your money to the NRA though - that's money well spent....

It's the same reason the left said that requiring a government issued ID to vote is an excessive burden.

 

[the DRIZZLE]

He won't.

If he was transiting with the weapon in an official capacity he's almost certainly fine. If he's doing so illegally in a private capacity, the Marines will be the first ones to send him up the river.

It might be a bad PR move for NYC, but what would he sue the city for?

He won't get a dollar in a civil suit but I would love for the Federal courts to start dismantling the unconstitutional gun laws in NY/NJ.

 

[OutHouse]

Gun laws are useless and deliberately target minorities.

I can go dig up the voter ID thread and give you a bunch of posts with people screaming "POLL TAX" over a $20 ID.

Most States give id's out for free. Poll tax not found

 

[OutHouse]

since when is $113 dollars a year that unreasonable a fee to own a gun?

Let's spruce it up some more and say its more than A THOUSAND DOLLARS and then put 'every 10 years' in really tiny print to stress how unreasonable this fee is?

Any fee, limit, or process that takes more than 2 words to describe, and the gun fanbois are up in arms...keep on sending your money to the NRA though - that's money well spent....

What if I cant pay?

 

[Lithium381]

the fee isn't to OWN the gun, it's to register it, but you're not allowed to have a gun if it's not registered. right lefties?

 

[monovillage]

since when is $113 dollars a year that unreasonable a fee to own a gun?

Let's spruce it up some more and say its more than A THOUSAND DOLLARS and then put 'every 10 years' in really tiny print to stress how unreasonable this fee is?

Any fee, limit, or process that takes more than 2 words to describe, and the gun fanbois are up in arms...keep on sending your money to the NRA though - that's money well spent....

You would have more of a point if the State charged $113 a year for you to attend a church of your choice. or charged $113 a year for you to register to vote. or charged $113 to register you for a protest. or charged $113 to register you for an attorney to defend you or charged you $113 to register your freedom of speech. or.... but you get the point, keeping and bearing arms is a right. The State should not apply prohibitive expenses for a citizen to exercise a right.
Anti-gun citizens have perfectly valid points, but they need to amend the Constitution, not pass unconstitutional regulations to limit existing rights.

 

[Genx87]

since when is $113 dollars a year that unreasonable a fee to own a gun?

Let's spruce it up some more and say its more than A THOUSAND DOLLARS and then put 'every 10 years' in really tiny print to stress how unreasonable this fee is?

Any fee, limit, or process that takes more than 2 words to describe, and the gun fanbois are up in arms...keep on sending your money to the NRA though - that's money well spent....

Is $113 dollars a year unreasonable for free speech or voting rights?

Since when did it become ok for the state to charge to excercise our consitutional rights?
Perhaps you would be happy with a 4th amendment processing charge to go along with a 2nd amendment charge.

 

[Mursilis]

The two are not equal. Voting is a privilege, owning a gun is a right.

The U.S. Constitution disagrees with you. It's called a right several times within that document, most recently in the 26th Amendment:

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age. Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

​

 

[NeoV]

first of all, I completely agree that you should have to present some form of ID to vote

2nd - since when is 113 a year, on average, a prohibitive fee? If you can't afford that, you probably shouldn't be spending your money on a gun anyway

 

[NeoV]

and can we stop pretending that the 2nd amendment has anything at all do do with the modern-day United States?

If you really think your militia is going to have anything to do with stopping the government from doing whatever the hell it want's to, good luck with that...

no one is taking away the right to own guns in this country - it's political suicide, so rest easy knowing that no one will be prying your guns away from your cold dead fingers

Hell, since it's a 'right', why don't we just give guns away?

This 'fake' outrage is just another example of the gun nazi's getting their panties in a wad anytime someone paints any action, fee, law, or discussion about guns in a manner that isn't the equivalent of them being blown.

Get over it, worry about issues that really matter, this isn't one of them.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally Posted by eskimospy
I like how you manufacture an idea of what is an unreasonable fee and then expect me to jump on board. Once again, you guys expose your ignorance.

Show me where it costs $340 to administer the costs of issuing a gun permit and you might have a point. Otherwise your just full of bullshit.

LOL, ignoring this point? Or is my request "nonsensical".

 

[fskimospy]

LOL, ignoring this point? Or is my request "nonsensical".

Your request isn't nonsensical, it's just stupid. You declared something unreasonable and then required that I prove it to be reasonable. That's not how things work in reality.

 

[Genx87]

and can we stop pretending that the 2nd amendment has anything at all do do with the modern-day United States?

If you really think your militia is going to have anything to do with stopping the government from doing whatever the hell it want's to, good luck with that...

no one is taking away the right to own guns in this country - it's political suicide, so rest easy knowing that no one will be prying your guns away from your cold dead fingers

Hell, since it's a 'right', why don't we just give guns away?

This 'fake' outrage is just another example of the gun nazi's getting their panties in a wad anytime someone paints any action, fee, law, or discussion about guns in a manner that isn't the equivalent of them being blown.

Get over it, worry about issues that really matter, this isn't one of them.

If you dont think the 2nd amendment applies to "modern day" america, whatever that means, then amend the constitution to erase the right. What you are saying is tantamount to "I dont think the 2nd amendment means anything, thus it doesnt mean anything." In the real world it doesnt work like that.

 

[fskimospy]

If you dont think the 2nd amendment applies to "modern day" america, whatever that means, then amend the constitution to erase the right. What you are saying is tantamount to "I dont think the 2nd amendment means anything, thus it doesnt mean anything." In the real world it doesnt work like that.

I agree that he takes it too far, and I personally believe that the 2nd amendment confers an individual right to arm yourself. That being said, I think that we must interpret the Constitution based on how it applies to today's world, not the world of 1789.

 

[Sunburn74]

This is a very interesting discussion. Even though I am strongly opposed to rampant gun proliferation in this country (I feel the most anyone should be allowed to own is a single handgun with 3 name engraved bullets and even then that may be 2 bullets too many), I think I have to side with the marine on this one.

A state can potentially undermine the second amendment by making the price of gun ownership extremely high. Technically if they wanted they could say, the cost of a license must equal your gross income for the year+ 1 dollar and thus deprive everyone of gun ownership in the state. This is unlike pretty much every other amendment which cannot be regulated by a cost measure in anyway. Licensure has to be free and the costs picked up by taxes on the general public since the amendments were passed by the general public. The thing is unless there is some sort of public referendum as to what a prohibitive fee is, you have to assume that any fee at all is prohibitive when you are talking about rights and not simply privileges.

It really hurts to say that but I think the marine is totally right.

 

[nobodyknows]

Your request isn't nonsensical, it's just stupid. You declared something unreasonable and then required that I prove it to be reasonable. That's not how things work in reality.

And I asked you to show me how it can cost over $300 to adminster the program, which is what they claim the money is for.

$330 for a piece of paper in order to exercise your right to beasr arms? Justify that or it is unreasonable by definition. Screw you and your double talk. Explain to me how it can possibly cost that much. You see in my reality we can have different, sometimes opposing view points. When someone asks a question you should try to explain your position rather then just attacking the other's position by saying "it's just stupid".

The license is good for 3 years, so it's $330 to do the paperwork once? That's unreasonable to anyone with a modicom of common sense.

 

[fskimospy]

And I asked you to show me how it can cost over $300 to adminster the program, which is what they claim the money is for.

$330 for a piece of paper in order to exercise your right to beasr arms? Justify that or it is unreasonable by definition. Screw you and your double talk. Explain to me how it can possibly cost that much. You see in my reality we can have different, sometimes opposing view points. When someone asks a question you should try to explain your position rather then just attacking the other's position by saying "it's just stupid".

The license is good for 3 years, so it's $330 to do the paperwork once? That's unreasonable to anyone with a modicom of common sense.

I'm sorry, but this isn't how reality works. How many times do I have to tell you that? You don't get to declare something and then force other people to disprove your unfounded declaration. (I did like your attempt to declare it 'unreasonable by definition, that was particularly hilarious)

You made a claim, now go back it up.

If you believe the fee to be excessive related to implementation costs, why don't you go research it and get back to us? It is certainly possible that such a fee is punitively high. All the documentation you will need is probably available online, so instead of just pulling random declarations out of your ass, actually back up something that you say.

 

[cybrsage]

Well, first, the outrage over the ID laws is a fully justified outrage. Second, this unlike the voter ID laws is not being done explicitly for political purposes.

I bet you honestly believe this too! Wow.

 

[cybrsage]

eskimospy is correct, the person making the statement about zyx is required to support their statement. The person saying "you are full of bunk" is not required to disprove the person who made the original statement. If they easily can, most will because it ends it right then and there, but the requirement of proof is on the original claimant.

For example (to use a highly charged one), if someone says "there is no God", the proof of supporting said statement is on the person making the claim, not on the person who says "a fool says in his heart, there is no God".

So in short, esk is correct. When esk and I agree on something, you know it has to be right.

 

[Lithium381]

I'm not sure, when did the organization that creates and scores the SAT become part of the US government?

What about ID being required (BY LAW) for tobacco and alcohol (and vinegar ) Stores aren't part of the US government yet they are subject to the law

 

[nobodyknows]

I'm sorry, but this isn't how reality works. How many times do I have to tell you that? You don't get to declare something and then force other people to disprove your unfounded declaration. (I did like your attempt to declare it 'unreasonable by definition, that was particularly hilarious)

You made a claim, now go back it up.

If you believe the fee to be excessive related to implementation costs, why don't you go research it and get back to us? It is certainly possible that such a fee is punitively high. All the documentation you will need is probably available online, so instead of just pulling random declarations out of your ass, actually back up something that you say.

Geesh, I backed it up and you keep dodging the question. Once you start charging people to exercise their rights guaranteed to them by the constitution. you are on the downhill slide towards Totalitarianism.

If you can get a drivers license that's good for 5 years for $25 then how much can it cost to issue a gun license. Since its a right, not a privilege any amount is unreasonable, but for the sake of argument we will allow the state to cover their costs of administration.

How much should it cost for that? If the question is too hard for you, then say so.