What would you think of a revival of the poll tax? What if a congressman proposed that any who wished to exercise their right to vote should first pay $100 for that right?
That would be outrageous, no? A right is a right, not a privilege. It is unconscionable to demand that a person who wishes to exercise their constitutional rights must first pay money, but that is exactly what a Democrat lawmaker has proposed.
New York representative Nydia Velazquez has introduced legislation entitled the “Reducing Gun Violence in our Neighborhoods Act.” The bill calls for a tax on each and every firearm sold in America of $100- an unconstitutional fee that is to be collected and given to Obama’s radicalized Department of Justice to fund mental health and anti-violence campaigns.
Somehow, I doubt that any money collected would be going to NRA safety programs which have saved many lives through their education about gun safety…
Announcing the legislation, Velazquez labored under the belief that gun, not people, are the cause of crimes and said,
“This bill will take meaningful steps to address the issue, reducing the flow of guns on the street, empowering law enforcement to better track missing weapons, while investing in community anti-violence programs.”
The bill also calls for a $10,000 penalty for lawful gun owners who have their firearms stolen and do not report them within 48 hours.
“The time has come to move past serial numbers that are often scraped off, preventing authorities from carrying out justice,” Velazquez said.
The bill’s co-sponsor, New York Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, joined with Velazquez to announce the legislation and slammed Second Amendment supporters, saying that it was time for gun control critics to wake up from their “Second Amendment addiction slumber.”
Because to the radical left, those who wish to preserve the Constitution are being, somehow, “unreasonable.”
Apply this same line of “logic” to any constitutional right and we can see that it is not only an affront to our very premise of self-governance, but an affront to our rights as free human beings.
What if we were forced to pay a fee for the right to speak freely?
Imagine if an officer came to our door and said, “I don’t have a warrant, but if you don’t want me searching every inch of your home, cut me a check for $100.” Would that not be the very definition of tyranny?
Still, because firearms and those who wish to protect our Second Amendment are so demonized by liberals, we are supposed to find these brands of infringements more palatable. Why? Because this brand of tyranny comes with the promise that it will reduce gun deaths?
I am still waiting for someone to explain to me how my legally owned firearms are contributors to gun violence in America and, furthermore, why I should be burdened with the expense of offsetting the damage done by criminals when I, myself, am a law-abiding citizen.
When we reach this point in our republic, it appears painfully clear that those who support the Constitution cannot be contented with modest rebuffs of fanatical gun control effort; we must march ever forward to secure an augmenting of our Second Amendment rights.