Quote:
Originally Posted by unsunghero
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Interesting, so San Jose wants to discriminate against the poor. They want people who can afford to pay a subscription to have the means to defend themselves such as the rich and middle class to be allowed to have guns, but to make it so those that cannot afford a monthly subscription for their gun to not have their second amendment right
Pretty classist, I expect some quick lawsuits. Maybe San Jose is trying to imply that poor people are more likely to be criminals who hurt others with guns? Cause I could afford a gun subscription, but pretty sure someone making minimum wage can’t
Yea this would essentially take guns out of the hands of the poor. Very interesting angle for a Dem proposal
|
That was the goal of tax stamp’s originally. When that was first introduced, $200 was an inordinate amount of money for anyone who wasn’t wealthy. Yet another leftist policy meant to further the divide