Sat Dec 22, 2012, 12:47 PM

Ter (4,173 posts)

For all those who care about the poor

Where is the "poll tax" outrage on NYC's gun application fees? It cost $340 to apply, and $91.50 for the fingerprint fee. How is this possible? How is this discriminatory law still standing? Has it been challenged?

14 replies, 790 views

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

14 replies	Author	Time	Post
For all those who care about the poor (Original post)	Ter	Dec 2012	OP
Now you're gonna get it from our resident Bloomie worshipper, any minute now ... N/T	DonP	Dec 2012	#1
5...4...3...2...1...	Tuesday Afternoon	Dec 2012	#2
Apparently, nobody cares	Travis_0004	Dec 2012	#3
Expect posts from those calling for higher taxes on all things firearms while posting	jody	Dec 2012	#4
In NYC there are two classes of citizens. The rich and the poor. ...	spin	Dec 2012	#5
I think it is more classist than racist	gejohnston	Dec 2012	#7
The 1% probably would like to limit gun ownership to their group. (n/t)	spin	Dec 2012	#8
given the number of conservative 1 percenters that are "anti gun"	gejohnston	Dec 2012	#10
Stallone is not anti-gun for the poor	Ter	Dec 2012	#11
since Trump, like the publisher of the NYT	gejohnston	Dec 2012	#12
My guess: Anyone who can't afford the fees can't afford a lawsuit against the state.	PavePusher	Dec 2012	#6
That's why several states are discouraging Illinois from appealing the CCW decision	DonP	Dec 2012	#9
It should be $10 a round additional, maybe you folks wouldn't buy a gazillion unneeded rounds...	DainBramaged	Dec 2012	#13
The better off gun owners can subsidize the lower income gun owners	Kaleva	Dec 2012	#14

Response to Ter (Original post)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 12:50 PM

DonP (3,719 posts)

1. Now you're gonna get it from our resident Bloomie worshipper, any minute now ... N/T

Reply to this post

Response to DonP (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 12:57 PM

Tuesday Afternoon (43,868 posts)

2. 5...4...3...2...1...

...

Reply to this post

Response to Ter (Original post)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 12:57 PM

Travis_0004 (934 posts)

3. Apparently, nobody cares

I've heard many people on this site that want to tax guns and ammo out of existence. So if you are rich, its fine, but if you are poor tough luck.

Reply to this post

Response to Ter (Original post)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 01:03 PM

jody (26,624 posts)

4. Expect posts from those calling for higher taxes on all things firearms while posting

elsewhere against free voter ID laws.

Reply to this post

Response to Ter (Original post)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 01:16 PM

spin (14,730 posts)

5. In NYC there are two classes of citizens. The rich and the poor. ...

The poor are considered to lack the responsibility required to own or carry a firearm.

It is also possible that the gun control laws in NYC are a disguised form of racism.

Reply to this post

Response to spin (Reply #5)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 02:27 PM

gejohnston (12,572 posts)

7. I think it is more classist than racist

unless they discriminate against wealthy blacks, which wouldn't surprise me about NYC either.

Reply to this post

Response to gejohnston (Reply #7)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 03:39 PM

spin (14,730 posts)

8. The 1% probably would like to limit gun ownership to their group. (n/t)

Reply to this post

Response to spin (Reply #8)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 03:49 PM

gejohnston (12,572 posts)

10. given the number of conservative 1 percenters that are "anti gun"

like Trump and Stallone, yeah I think so.

Reply to this post

Response to gejohnston (Reply #10)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 01:58 PM

Ter (4,173 posts)

11. Stallone is not anti-gun for the poor

No idea about Trump, however.

Reply to this post

Response to Ter (Reply #11)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 02:10 PM

gejohnston (12,572 posts)

12. since Trump, like the publisher of the NYT

Last edited Tue Dec 25, 2012, 02:13 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

have NYC concealed carry permits, I would say he is. Or just a hypocrite. That is how I view rich people who are anti gun but pay people to carry guns for them. Don't like my target pistol or hunting rifle, lose the bodyguard.

Reply to this post

Response to Ter (Original post)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 01:25 PM

PavePusher (15,374 posts)

6. My guess: Anyone who can't afford the fees can't afford a lawsuit against the state.

However, I think the SAF has made some rumblings in this direction, if some of their other efforts don't pan out. Keep an eye on them, they're the most effective pro-2A litigators in history.

Reply to this post

Response to PavePusher (Reply #6)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 03:46 PM

DonP (3,719 posts)

9. That's why several states are discouraging Illinois from appealing the CCW decision

NY, California and a few others have already contacted Lisa Madigan, Illinois AG, and are encouraging her NOT to appeal the recent appellate court decision insisting on a CCW for Illinois. Rahm is trying to get her to appeal and hoping for an extended court process to delay the inevitable.

If it reaches SCOTUS, which it probably would, the "May Issue" states are seriously concerned that the issue of obvious discrimination in May Issue CCW issuance may get it thrown out as unconstitutional.

Either way, the clock is ticking. Illinois has 180 days from December 10th (IIRC) to pass and install a CCW law or we revert to Constitutional Carry. I don't see our resident political characters missing out on the revenue from CC permits so we'll have something and our Downstate Dems are leaning heavily to a Shall Issue model.

Reply to this post

Response to Ter (Original post)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 08:43 PM

DainBramaged (37,805 posts)

13. It should be $10 a round additional, maybe you folks wouldn't buy a gazillion unneeded rounds...

have a nice night.

Reply to this post

Response to Ter (Original post)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 08:52 PM

Kaleva (11,406 posts)

14. The better off gun owners can subsidize the lower income gun owners

Higher fees and taxes to could go to lower the fees for the poor. Maybe even subsidize the price of guns and ammo. Heck, I'd be thrilled to get a new gun if the rest of you paid for it!

In reality, I wouldn't accept such a thing as I really don't need a firearm. Just as I turned down new windows and doors for my place offered by the local community action. I can pay for that myself over a period of a couple of years if I really watch what I spend my money on and budget about $100 a month for that.

Reply to this post

Gun Control & RKBA (Group)