A number of communities in New Jersey are doing something great. They’re simply giving people the money for permit fees back. They don’t need the money; the fees are stupid, and while they may be required to collect them, the state doesn’t require them to keep them.
It’s been pretty glorious to see, and I applaud every city leader who backs these initiatives.
And those cities with GOP leadership who would rather not support it, the smart move is to just not bring it up for a vote. Unfortunately, as our own John Petrolino noted on Monday, the Borough of Old Tappan, New Jersey, decided to go with a different strategy.
They discussed it and voted it down. The problem I have, though, is that this is Republican leadership, and their so-called rationale is asinine.
Under the leadership of Mayor Thomas Gallagher, the all Republican council voted against the measure. Councilmembers during the debate phase of the resolution introduction compared the $150 permit to carry fee to other municipal obligations or seemed dismissive of the real burden the fee placed on applicants.
“Fees don’t infringe on your right to own a pet, build on your property or even own a gun,” Councilman Jin Yhu said. “Rather, fees help us offset the costs when residents decide to exercise some of these rights.”
Councilman Ron Binaghi Jr. said he did some research. Binaghi accurately listed that the financial burden of becoming a gun owner in the State of New Jersey could be upwards of $1,000. Once accounting for all other fees, training, and firearm purchase, Binaghi however said, “Paying $150 for a permit is one of the lower expenses on this list.” He further observed, “So when you add it all up, I don’t feel like it creates a hardship for the prospective gun owner who can afford the other items on the list.”
“If you take away the word gun, it becomes just a permit application,” Binaghi further mused, “and I feel it should be treated as the same as any other permit application, which includes a fee for the services that the borough provides.”
Fees actually do infringe on your right to own a pet or build on your property, so it most definitely infringes on your right to own a gun. A fee is a barrier to entry. As someone who has been looking at building property, government regulation is a huge part of the cost of building literally anything, so claiming it’s not an infringement is particularly stupid.
And yes, fees to own a pet are also idiotic. If you want to mandate vaccinations, which I can see, that’s one thing. That’s a health and safety thing. Beyond that, it’s nothing but a money-grab disguised as something else.
As Binaghi noted, the fees can get ridiculous, and local governments across New Jersey are helping their constituents handle this better by giving them their money back. If Old Tappan is cash-strapped and simply can’t afford to refund the fees, have the cajones to just admit that. “We’d love to, but we can’t because we need every single penny we can scrape together to keep the lights on.”
The fact that there’s no indication that this is the case tells me that what we have here are so-called Republicans who seem to think that a little infringement is OK.
I get that in very blue states, you often get a breed of Republican that is more anti-gun control than pro-gun. They don’t really value the right to keep and bear arms or restoring that right. They’re more interested in the status quo.
The problem is that people deserve better.
What’s more, as another councilman noted, it’s redundant as hell.
Councilman Juan Marti brought the resolution to the town for introduction. Marti explained the factual basis around the rebate resolution and how “the same process, background checks has to be done when somebody goes to get a firearms ID card, which they need in the State of New Jersey, the same background has to be done when somebody wants to buy a pistol.”
The documents that Marti referenced are required to even apply for a permit to carry. He explained that essentially all the vetting is done prior to carry permit application and the “$150 fee was basically a slap to law-abiding gun owners in New Jersey” and done with malicious intent by Trenton lawmakers and Governor Murphy.
So basically, the councilmen and women who took a big, steamy dump on this proposal were, in fact, putting a rubber stamp on a malicious replication of law designed specifically to punish anyone who wants to exercise their Second Amendment rights.
That’s nowhere near the same as a building permit or a dog license.
Folks in Old Tappan need to step up in the next election and do the right thing. They need to clean house. Marti is clearly one of the good ones. Anyone who sided with him should stay. The rest?
Let them be anti-gun control on their own dime. New Jersey needs actual pro-gun leadership up and down the system, starting with local leaders.
Editor’s Note: All around the nation, some Republicans aren’t living up to their promises. They’re opposing the effort to restore our rights and backing anti-gun efforts to maintain an unacceptable status quo.
Help us continue exposing their betrayal of Republican values. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your membership.
Read the full article here
