Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
H.R.127 - To provide for the licensing of firearm and ammunition possession and the registration of firearms, and to prohibit the possession of certain ammunition.
It's unconstitutional to try to prohibit something indirectly with taxes and fees. If you recall, it was done before with voting.
Imagine if we slap a $5,000 tax on abortion and a $100 voting tax on while we are at it. Does that sound good to you as well?
But certain firearms are already heavily taxed and regulated. Anything requiring an AFT type 2 license for example.
The well-regulated part gets ya. The supreme court refused to hear a couple cases this year challenging Mass's FID laws too. To own, use, or carry a firearm in MA, you have to have a FID or LTC license, which costs $100. Federal courts below the supreme court find that constitutional.
It's unconstitutional to try to prohibit something indirectly with taxes and fees. If you recall, it was done before with voting.
Imagine if we slap a $5,000 tax on abortion and a $100 voting tax on while we are at it. Does that sound good to you as well?
Preposterous statement. If you're referring to Roberts's Obamacare decision, where he specifically stated the individual mandate was within Congress's taxing power, you'd know that Congress obviously has the power to use taxes to effectuate policy ends (what I think you mean by "prohibit" i.e. a soda tax or something).
I don't know whether you'd be able to tax abortions, but poll taxes have been Unconstitutional since 1964.
Agree with you. Who gives a crap about the constitution and people’s rights?
Putting words in my mouth. I don't deny that SCOTUS interprets the Second Amendment the way it does. I can't change that. Doesn't change the fact that DC v. Heller is a bad decision.
But certain firearms are already heavily taxed and regulated. Anything requiring an AFT type 2 license for example.
The well-regulated part gets ya. The supreme court refused to hear a couple cases this year challenging Mass's FID laws too. To own, use, or carry a firearm in MA, you have to have a FID or LTC license, which costs $100. Federal courts below the supreme court find that constitutional.
Yes and thats UNCONSTITUTIONAL TOO!! We should not be complying with that in the first place.
Putting words in my mouth. I don't deny that SCOTUS interprets the Second Amendment the way it does. I can't change that. Doesn't change the fact that DC v. Heller is a bad decision.
So you don’t believe free people should have the right to defend themselves against a tyrannical government?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
