(Some) sympathy for the state gun owners

I have no doubt that some people will face real hardship if the cost of pistol permits goes up.

I have no doubt some people, maybe a lot of people, will face real hardship if the cost of pistol permits goes up. Gov. Dannel P. Malloy has proposed increasing permit fees from $75 to $300, and a separate background check from $50 to $75. The hike will bring in an estimated $11.6 million in revenue, and given our eternal budget woe, we need every dollar.

But one man’s revenue is another man’s expense. That’s why I’m sympathetic to those like Scott Wilson, president of the politically influential Connecticut Citizens Defense League, who said of his 23,000 members that “a lot of people ... are not going to renew their permits.”

I’m less sympathetic to those turning this into a constitutional crisis. They are too eager to form ranks according familiar political themes.

Some say raising permit fees is an infringement of the Second Amendment. (It’s not.) Others compare it to a poll tax. (Ha!) Others still, like House Minority Leader Themis Klarides, R-Derby, portray gun owners as if they were victims of a political purge: “To go after the person who works hard and pays taxes because you don’t agree with their personal choices that are protected by the Constitution is just plain wrong,” she said. (Wow!)

Look, the Second Amendment is special. It’s the only one of our guaranteed individual liberties that costs you. You can exercise the right to vote without spending money. Ditto for the right to worship, speak and assemble. But you can’t exercise the right to keep and bear arms without some kind of outlay: from a few extra dollars on your homeowners insurance for keeping Grandpa’s musket loader to keeping up on the latest and greatest technological firearm trends.

That’s why I’m not too sympathetic to those facing the hardship of increased pistol permit fees, because if you’re a member of the Connecticut Defense League, or you’re a part of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, which is also raising a stink over the proposed fee increase, you not only pay dues and donate money but you actively participate in Connecticut’s gun culture, and that already costs you. How much? Say you want the most popular handgun. According to concealednation.com, that would be the Glock 26 and Glock 27, otherwise known as the “Baby Glock.” Its retail price is $599. The cost of 50, 9 mm rounds is somewhere between $10 and $20 a box, depending on the brand. The last time I was at a firing range, I don’t remember how many rounds I shot, but it was way more than 50. So if you go to a firing range just once a year, and fire off just one box (but probably way more), you have exceeded the cost of a pistol permit.

About that firing range. That’s another expense. You can pay per day, but if you’re active, the way members of the Connecticut Citizens Defense League are no doubt active, you probably pay a membership fee to a gun club or range. That means you pay, for instance, nearly $600 a year at the Hartford Gun Club; $300 a year at Meriden Rod & Gun Club ($200 if you want to put in 10 hours a year of “work time”); $400 a year at Chris’s Indoor Range and Gun Shop in Guilford; $25 a hour at the Bridgeport Shooting Range.

None of this is to say Malloy should boost permit fees. I don’t see any rationale other than the need to raise revenues from a reliable source, meaning law-abiding gun owners.

This isn’t about gun control. This is about money.

But gun owners and state Republicans courting their support don’t have much to complain about, either. Yes, the guy who inherited his Great Uncle Elmer’s sidearm but who otherwise doesn’t have much to do with Connecticut’s gun culture is going to be put out. And that’s a shame. But the majority of pistol permit holders will pay, like it or not, because going without their guns, sidearm or otherwise, is unthinkable. Editor’s note: This story has been updated to correct the estimated amount of revenue this proposed change in the permit fee would bring.

John Stoehr