This columnist seems to think that requiring people to pay to exercise a right is perfectly acceptable.

But the freedom to own a firearm doesn’t mean it has to be free of charge. It doesn’t mean that owners can’t be a tiny bit inconvenienced. And someone’s right to own a gun certainly does not trump the safety rights of the rest of us.

But who says that the people who choose to own firearms shouldn’t have to go into their pocketbooks every now and then?

Let’s apply that same logic to… voting. Free speech. Right to a trial. Right to privacy. Right to assembly and protest.

What if we required people to pay to vote?

What if we required people to pay to assemble?

What if we required people to pay to contact their representatives?

Rights are rights. We should not have to pay the government for permission to exercise a right.

Dahleen Glanton is claiming it is perfectly acceptable to put up barriers to intentionally “inconvenience” people and force people to pay to exercise a right. As an African American, she should study history a little bit more and maybe read up on poll taxes that were put in place to keep people from exercising their right to vote. Or maybe read up on the licensing requirements that were put in place to allow the government Martin Luther King Jr. a gun permit so he could defend himself.

The more I think about it, the more the irony is straight up painful that an African American woman would advocate for the exact system to be put in place that was once used to deny her ancestors their rights.

There’s nothing wrong with forcing the people who like guns to kick in the extra costs for law enforcement officials to run the program properly

Yes there is Dahleen. Yes there is something wrong with forcing people to pay to exercise a right.

Maybe you should crack open a history book.

(originally seen on the Chicago Tribune)