Skip to main content

View Diary: Let us start a dialogue in search of sensible gun laws (with poll) (179 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I never advocated confiscation. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tytalus, skohayes

    Please don't put words in my mouth. We don't confiscate the cars of uninsured drivers, do we? We cite them for violations of the law, and impose whatever penalties the law specifies. Generally this might be a fine and / or suspension of their driver's license.

     

    ... but He loves you! -- George Carlin -- (-7.25, -6.21)

    by Tim DeLaney on Sat Sep 14, 2013 at 12:17:38 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  My apologies (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      FrankRose

      I did not mean to put words in your mouth. It is just that if insurance is required, then there has to be something that happens if you do not have it, and this "something" needs to be legal within the current interpretation of the 2nd.

      So, the question remains unanswered. In your opinion, what happens if you do not have gun insurance? A fine for not having it falls into the poll tax category (which won't fly), and confiscation is off the table.

      Would it simply mean you cannot legally use the gun until the insurance is current? Can you transport it somewhere else in order to sell it? Can you use it on your own property (assuming this is safe to do)? I'm just looking for clarification.

      •  I disagree with this: (4+ / 0-)
        A fine for not having it falls into the poll tax category (which won't fly), ...
        If somebody breaks the law, why is a fine off the table?

        A poll tax is assessed as a precondition; a fine is a post-condition penalty. Two entirely different concepts.

        ... but He loves you! -- George Carlin -- (-7.25, -6.21)

        by Tim DeLaney on Sat Sep 14, 2013 at 01:12:17 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Gun license fees are not a poll tax (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Tim DeLaney, tytalus, skohayes

        See Kwong v. Bloomberg.

        Gun license fees fall under SCOTUS Fee Jurisprudence.

        "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

        by LilithGardener on Sat Sep 14, 2013 at 01:50:04 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Good catch (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          LilithGardener, FrankRose

          It is worth noting that the fee was allowed as legal by the court because it did not exceed the administrative costs associated with that permit, i.e. it was not in any sense punitive.

          •  And that is an important point (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            skohayes, Tim DeLaney

            The fee has to be both directly connected to the legitimate duty of the state to reduce crime and balance the individual expression of RKBA with the rights of others to enjoy public safety.

            The fee can not exceed the actual cost of administering and enforcing the license scheme. A few interesting points in Kwong v. Bloomberg.

            1. They challenged NYC fee of $340 (good for 3 years so ~$115/year).

            2. They did not challenge Nassau County's fee of $200 (good for 5 years so $40 per year).

            3. Other counties in the state are maximum $10 (for 3 years IIRC).

            The opinion explains how one important fact is that any other county can petition NY state to raise their fee, as long as the increased fee can be justified as defraying the cost of licensing.

            In this age of austerity with desperate local governments hard strapped for cash and no ability to raise tax revenue, there is a potential unintended consequence of these 2A litigations. All those other counties could decide to stop funding their  license program out of the general operating budget, and easily secure permission from the state to raise their handgun license fees to $50 every 2 years.

            "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

            by LilithGardener on Sat Sep 14, 2013 at 02:41:08 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  It is problematic nonetheless (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              KVoimakas, FrankRose

              Would you be as supportive if they had charged $340 for an administrative fee to vote in say Detriot? And made it a crime to try to vote without having paid the fee? If both voting and gun ownership are considered "rights" by the Supreme Court, then an administrative fee for one should mean a fee for the other is acceptable as well.

              In the wake of the recent Voting Rights Act ruling by the court, I think it is actually a bad precedent to set, whether for the 2nd or any other right. Do you know if the case was appealed, and if so, what is its status?

              •  2A allows you to own guns (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Tim DeLaney

                That doesn't preclude states or the feds from attaching non-onerous fees to license that gun- if you can afford a $600 rifle, a $50 licensing fee isn't out of the question.
                Do you feel the same about paying sales taxes when you buy the gun?

                Your beliefs don't make you a better person. Your behavior does.

                by skohayes on Sat Sep 14, 2013 at 05:05:38 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site