Posted on 07/16/2008 6:24:11 PM PDT by rlmorel
Governor Patrick Files Bill to Drastically Increase License Fees!
On Sunday July, 13, 2008 Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick filed a special appropriations bill for fiscal year 2008. (As of the filing of this report, the bill had not yet received a number.) Within this bill sections 24 - 27 drastically increase certain firearm licenses.
Sections 24 & 25 attack lawfully licensed firearm dealers by increasing their license fees from $100 for three years to $250. Then it adds a $100 inspection fee in years two and three of the license. This tactic would now turn a $100 three year dealer's license into a $450 three year license.
Section 26 would increase a resident License to Carry fee from $100 for six years to $200 for six years.
Section 27 would increase a non-resident License to Carry fee from $100 for one year to $250 for one year.
"In light of the recent Supreme Court ruling, this new proposal from the Governor can only be viewed as an attempt to tax people out of their civil rights," said Jim Wallace Executive Director of GOAL. "With this new proposal, the Governor continues to demonstrate his willingness to attack lawful gun owners while doing nothing to reduce violent crime. The highest court in the nation has ruled that citizens have an individual right to possess a firearm and now our Governor is trying to tax us out of that right!"
GOAL is urgently requesting that our members contact their local representatives and senators immediately and ask them to make sure this ridiculous tax on our rights does not pass into law.
___________________________________________________________________ An Act Making Appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2008 to Provide for Supplementing Certain Existing Appropriations and for Certain Other Activities and Projects
CHSB ";" License to Carry Fee -1 SECTION 24. Section 122 of chapter 140 of the General Laws, as appearing in the 2006 Official Edition, is hereby amended by striking out, in line 28, the figure " $100"; and inserting in place thereof the following figure:- $250.
CHSB ";" Annual Dealer License Fee SECTION 25. Said section 122 of said chapter 140, as so appearing, is hereby further amended by inserting after the word " Fund.";, in line 33, the following sentence:- Each year in which a license holder need not apply for a license renewal, the license holder shall pay to the licensing authority a license inspection fee of $100.
CHSB ";" License to Carry Fee ";" 2 SECTION 26. Section 131 of said chapter 140, as so appearing, is hereby amended by striking out, in line 240, the figure " $100"; and inserting in place thereof the following figure:- $200.
CHSB ";" Non Residential Firearms License Fee SECTION 27. Section 131F of said chapter 140, as so appearing, is hereby amended by striking out, in line 53, the figure " $100"; and inserting in place thereof the following figure:- $250.
Rhode Island $40, good for four years Connecticut $35, good for five years Maine $35, good for four years New Hampshire $10, good for four years
The total of these four states is only $20 more than one Massachusetts license (currently). Since the passage of the 1998 Gun Control Act, the number of licensed gun owners in Massachusetts has been decreased from 1,500,000 to approximately 240,000 (according to GOAL)
I know there are a lot of folks on Free Republic who will say "You get what you vote for", but there are a lot of conservatives who live up here in Massachusetts who didn't vote for this POS, and this appalling but predictable legislation, if passed is going to hit us hard.
I view this as a deliberate effort to rob people of their Second Amendment rights through taxation. I do not have a huge issue with paying something to offset the bureaucratic costs of maintaining a licensure system (Okay, I know we shouldn't have to pay anything, but I'm being realistic here)
The point is, what will stop them from raising the fees to $1000? Or $10,000? And if they can do that here, what will stop them from doing this in other states? Sure, I can hear people saying "That could never happen here..." but it seems to me that liberalism of the type exemplified by Barack Obama and the likes of him is more prevalent today than ever before, and they have no use for or acceptance of of Second Amendment rights. They view it as tobacco, and Patrick Deval (and many others) view the increase in fees for gun ownership as a "twofer"...they can raise money for their pet social programs, and inhibit (and in their dreams, destroy) gun ownership.
Perhaps the Gay State’s gun laws should be challenged as unfairly restricting/regulating gun ownership.
How are you not represented????? Is someone in Britain or Belgium or France assessing these taxes against you? Please advise.
We were a military family, and moved around a lot. I do like New England the best, and Massachusetts is a nice (and beautiful) place to live.
Except for the liberals.
Except for the politicians.
Except for the Taxes.
Except for...oh hell. Except for building the roads, making safe drinking water, bringing law and order, WHAT HAVE THE ROMANS EVER DONE FOR US?
(just a Monty Python reference there...:)
Come on. It was a joke...I am a conservative...in Massachusetts...
K...I get it. /not
Hmmmmm...... if I am licensed by the city or state can I write off all my gunsafes, firearms related periodicals, range fees, ammo, reloading gear , locking gun cases and insurance etc related too firearms on my taxes ?
I have to take issue with the title of this article, “taxation without representation”. The citizens in Massachusetts all have representation in the state government. This is in no way similar to the “taxation without representation” cry that came from our founding fathers, who truly did not have representation in Parliament when King George was imposing his taxes.
Thanks. FR is my only link to the “real” world...:)
GOOD GOD. Sorry. Call the Admin and have him change it. Sheesh.
Boy. Rush was right...don’t try this at home.
I was trying to find humor in a lousy situation. Talk about botching it...
And welcome to Free Republic.
“The highest court in the nation has ruled that citizens have an individual right to possess a firearm and now our Governor is trying to tax us out of that right!”
Looks like the Dems are once again damaging the poor, their supposed constituents.
This is an infringement of the 2nd Amendment, pure and simple. Somebody needs to challenge these fees in court.
Well this is Hump Day,it’s all down hill from here.
We pay 10 a year here in Alabama.Not bad and the County Office suggests we carry.
Saw that said in an email from FRC, and I think it is a perfect fit for them.
see post #17
DITTO. Since the courts ruled gun ownership is like voting, can the government charge people a fee to register to vote? If states can charge people for gun permits like drivers licenses, can they require one to pay for the cost of registering to vote????
Well, I have a bunch of tasks to complete, writing the letters, calling the offices and so on. Then I am going to join GOAL (Gun Owners Action League) tonight before I go to bed, because those folks have a great organization.
I think the NRA has given us up as a lost cause up here...but GOAL is aggressive and informative. There are a lot of things NOT to like about the way the Massachusetts government treats gun owners.
For example, they leave the “discretion” about whether to grant an applicant a license in the hands of the Chief of Police in each locality. In my town, you have to write a letter explaining why you want a conceal carry permit!
And they can deny you a license with no recourse. It sucks.
..(I listen about every day to Michael Graham)
Ah...I was a Duncan Hunter guy too. Sheesh. Look what we get now...:(
There are more conservatives up here than one might think, but the liberalism is set in stone here. It won’t last forever...we have guys like Bob Parks running, and there is actually a REPUBLICAN running for State Rep in my district (Pat Walrath’s seat, which she is vacating)
His name is Sonny Parente, and he is 26 years old. He holds the selectman seat in town my Dad used to hold...he got elected at age 22. I have high hopes for him. He is just a drop in the bucket, but...gotta start somewhere!
Sigh. The comment I made about Taxation Without Representation is not that far off base...the state government is nearly unresponsive to the people. Look at what happened when we got enough signatures to get a ballot referendum placed on homosexual marriage...they simply obfuscated their way around it and ignored it.
Not to say some of us won’t keep trying.
Yes, poll tax was the first thing I thought of.
Me too. I have been dwelling on this all day, and that seemed like the closest analogy.
If it’s a civil right, how can it be legal to tax gun ownership? That would be like taxing free speech or church membership.
I’m sure this will lower the crime rate overnight...Another brilliant decision by the royal governor...To think our revolution began in Mass...Now the descent into tyranny seems to be starting here as well...and the sheeple proudly display their set of Deval and Obama stickers on their subaruus and volvos.
They are following the same play book that their racist Democrat brethren did in the first half of the 20th century. Taxes, regulation, defiance in the face of court orders the works. More will come.
The difference is that we have BEEN THERE BEFORE, and a tax on a right is illegal by many previous rulings. Onerous regulation can't be a requirement of a Right. Courts take serious the government official that defy their orders.
All these people are doing is making their ultimate defeat easier.
Well, I suppose technically it isn’t a tax, it is a fee...and I DO have representation up here.
I just thought...this is where the revolution started...I don’t feel like I am being represented and my rights and money are being taken from me, so on and so forth...
I guess the libs would say it is a fee and not a tax...if we call it something else, that will make it so.
It's a financial barrier erected to prevent you from exercising a Constitutionally protected individual right. It's a clear infringement. Can the state charge you a "fee" to attend church? Must you pay fees to speak your mind in public?
We don’t disagree.
Citizens of Massachusetts (and America as a whole), you have the guns.
Let me repeat that.
YOU have the guns!
If this increase in fees occurs it is precisely because you chose not to stop it. No bad act of law can stand in the face of a sufficiently determined and armed people who are saying NO!
Organize, mobilize and exercise your Second Amendment rights if need be.
Hmm. Right.
“challenged as unfairly restricting/regulating gun ownership.”
I think you’re on the right track. Form a group, gather contributions and hire a good lawyer. Attacking a law as unfair, unconscionable, capricious and arbitrary is a strategy I’ve seen used to get rid of leftist bureaucratic regulations.
I think that any challenge to the state's laws would have to be closely connected to the recent SCOTUS ruling.The court said "reasonable restrictions".Is a $500 registration fee "reasonable" when most states seem to be able to do it for $25? Or is it just a way to dissuade average folks from exercising their now-confirmed rights under the Second Amendment?
I read the other day that DC is still gonna require that guns in the home be disassembled or have trigger locks on.My understanding of Heller suggests that that's a blatant defiance of the court's ruling.But I ain't no lawyer,so.....
And that is why they continue to ignore The Constitution and the voters.
That “Hmm. Right.” mindset.
Of course you’re probably voicing the same sentiment every last one of the “Outraged” and “Disappointed” citizens feels as they take another one in the out door.
As long as we are afraid to exercise our G_d given rights fully and at need we don’t have any rights, we have empty mouthed platitudes from a dead document and masters who will decide what’s best for us.
I resent your attitude. You have a lot of gall.
YOU are advocating I load up my gun with ammunition march on Town Hall, exercise my Second Amendment rights, then you are basically calling me a pussy because I don’t do it.
YOU say I am someone who is just going to bellyache about something and do nothing about it.
You know nothing about me, what I stand for and what my attitude towards the LAW is.
I could just as easily say YOU are an armchair general who talks tough but is the first one to wet his pants and skulk out of the way of harm when the first bullets fly, and that it is fine to be a melodrama queen, as long as it isn’t your ass on the line.
But I won’t, because I don’t you from Adam. You could at least extend that courtesy to me, which you have not done.
I personally haven’t given up on FOLLOWING THE LAW.
Just because I disagree with a law does not give me the RIGHT to break it in a lawful society, make violent threats or even actually engage in violence. We are a country of LAWS. UNTIL I have exhausted all means to change the laws I disagree with (via the avenues provided for in the rules of society we live in) I am not going to engage in an open provocation of violence.
If I understand you correctly, that is exactly what you advocate, loading my Garand up with ammo, getting a like minded mob and threatening people. Do I understand you correctly?
That comes across clearly enough in your attitude. You should try some mouthwash.
Yeah. I made it up out of whole cloth. I disagree. I think I have the measure of you just fine.
I took you out of context? I don't think so, you just aren't principled enough to stand behind what you clearly meant. The cry of "Oh, I was taken out of context..." is usually what I expect to hear from politicians. Perhaps if you hadn't swallowed so much of what they put out it might not have rubbed off on you.
The fact that you think a mob of angry people descending on town hall with baseball bats to intimidate the politicians is a great thing says volumes about you. You think that is just dandy, but you don't draw the line at baseball bats. You think people should just take their weapons down to town hall and brandish them in the face of elected officials.
You are a fine example of responsible exercise of Second Amendment rights. I am sure the NRA would love you.
Not.
It is hard enough to be a gun owner without having to explain to people who might be neutral on the subject why there are people like you who think it would be a good thing to go down to town hall with weapons to intimidate people.
Your attitude fits in fine in Sierra Leone or some other third world hell hole which I am sure you would be all to quick to condemn, but your mobs of people with baseball bats don't belong here.
I find your mincing approach to defending G_d given rights perpetually under assault by politicians and leftist groups to be an exercise in futility, but that's your call.
Have a good day and enjoy your new exorbitant fees on the exercise of your temporarily state granted rights.
You’ve already given up. That’s your call.
I still believe this country can be saved without a baseball bat in hand. If it comes down to guns and bats, what you and I think is going to be irrelevant.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.