No thanks, on either one. When "they" pay for it (with stolen money) they will demand to control it, and to control who is "eligible." I'll pay for my own, thanks. :)
A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the federal constitution... The power to impose a license tax on the exercise of these freedoms is indeed as potent as the power of censorship which this Court has repeatedly struck down... a person cannot be compelled 'to purchase, through a license fee or a license tax, the privilege freely granted by the constitution.' --MURDOCK V. PENNSYLVANIA 319 US 105 (1942)
I think Steve’s just taking this principle to heart. You don’t even need the license in Arizona to carry openly or concealed, except in restaurants that serve alcohol (where you can’t drink anyway). It’s mostly useful to have in your pocket when traveling through reciprocity states.
And Mama, if you don’t want to take the state’s handout covering your license expenses, just don’t claim the tax credit.
No thanks, on either one. When "they" pay for it (with stolen money) they will demand to control it, and to control who is "eligible." I'll pay for my own, thanks. :)
ReplyDeleteA state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the federal constitution... The power to impose a license tax on the exercise of these freedoms is indeed as potent as the power of censorship which this Court has repeatedly struck down... a person cannot be compelled 'to purchase, through a license fee or a license tax, the privilege freely granted by the constitution.'
ReplyDelete--MURDOCK V. PENNSYLVANIA 319 US 105 (1942)
I think Steve’s just taking this principle to heart. You don’t even need the license in Arizona to carry openly or concealed, except in restaurants that serve alcohol (where you can’t drink anyway). It’s mostly useful to have in your pocket when traveling through reciprocity states.
And Mama, if you don’t want to take the state’s handout covering your license expenses, just don’t claim the tax credit.