Quote:
Originally Posted by sperbonzo
In the OP, he said " . If you can't afford the policy, then you can't afford the gun.", thus making out that somehow your ability to own a weapon to protect your home and family should be tied to your ability to afford some special added fee as a barrier, and that the government should make that barrier harder to cross, so as to deny more people that right simply based on their income.
This was the same concept that brought us the "poll tax" making it harder for poor people to afford to vote. Make things artificially more expensive so that only the lowest income brackets are denied their rights, as if being more able to afford to have a right means that you will be more responsible with it.
.
|
says the guy lives in a mansion in panama. really the same thing could be said about any kind of insurance. auto, rental, etc. its just a talking point to say its a barrier to keep the poor out. its more about accountability. if something happens when using the gun, insurance will cover financial damages. if you have a criminal record or whatever reason there might be to refuse a person insurance or charge them much more its a way to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people. same way auto insurance skyrockets if you've been convicted of dui or whatever.