Realistic opinions on O's tax on weapons and ammo.

[Miggy]

BAILEY V. DREXEL FURNITURE CO., 259 U. S. 20 (1922) -- US Supreme Court Cases from Justia & Oyez

"An act of Congress which clearly, on its face, is designed to penalize, and thereby to discourage or suppress, conduct the regulation of which is reserved by the Constitution exclusively to the States, cannot be sustained under the federal taxing power by calling the penalty a tax."

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[GWRedDragon]

BAILEY V. DREXEL FURNITURE CO., 259 U. S. 20 (1922) -- US Supreme Court Cases from Justia & Oyez

"An act of Congress which clearly, on its face, is designed to penalize, and thereby to discourage or suppress, conduct the regulation of which is reserved by the Constitution exclusively to the States, cannot be sustained under the federal taxing power by calling the penalty a tax."

Didn't they basically gut that decision after FDR in the 30s? That protects areas of law reserved to the states, and nowadays (post 1930s) almost everything falls under the purview of Congress through interstate commerce.

[coffeecup]

Here's my take. With the majority of both house of Congress in liberal hands Obama will pretty much get what he wants for the next 2 years. A 500% tax on arms and ammunition may be a REAL possibility if he wants it. But, he will also want to be re-elected and MAY need the support of gun owners and those employed in the firearms trade. Dont for one minute forget that Obama is a product of the Daly machine in Chicago and we all know how firearm friendly they are----NOT!!!!!

Yep, a 500% (or more) tax is a VERY real possibility!

[Mikey]

They did it to cigarettes: I mean look you can purchase cigs from Indy. reserv. for $3.25 and in stores they go for $4.99 it's not 500% increase but still very significant.

[mmargotta]

A 500% tax on ammunition and firearms would cause sales of those items to drop by a lot, maybe 90%. All ammunition and firearm companies would have excess capacity and employees, and would likely go bankrupt. The police and military would begin to have great difficulty buying the ammunition and firearms they need, because the manufacturers rely upon the civilian market for a big share of their sales and profits.

Additionally, I don't believe a punitive tax like this would pass legal scrutiny in the courts.

They would make a tax excemption for law enforcement, I'm sure.

[pogo2]

They would make a tax excemption for law enforcement, I'm sure.

Yes, I would presume that law enforcement might receive a tax exemption for ammo purchases. But my point was that a large, punitive tax on civilian sales might kill most ammunition manufacturers because their volume and profits made on the civilian market would disappear. So their costs would go up, due to much lower volume of production, and they would have to raise prices on their remaining sales to survive. So the law enforcement customers would be looking at higher prices for sure on their ammunition use.

[mmargotta]

Yes, I would presume that law enforcement might receive a tax exemption for ammo purchases. But my point was that a large, punitive tax on civilian sales might kill most ammunition manufacturers because their volume and profits made on the civilian market would disappear. So their costs would go up, due to much lower volume of production, and they would have to raise prices on their remaining sales to survive. So the law enforcement customers would be looking at higher prices for sure on their ammunition use.

Yes I understand; but that only applies to a capitalistic society, I'm sure the big O has plans to change all of that!
Sorry for the rant.......

[Hopyard]

I'm sure the big O has plans to change all of that!
Sorry for the rant.......

There is a human behavior called "mind reading."
We all do it all the time, but it is flawed thinking.
No one knows what someone else is thinking until they tell you.

I am a news hound. I have heard of no proposal by any politician to do some of the draconian things people are talking about.

Just because we think it, just because we somehow believe we know what politicians are thinking, doesn't make it so.

From a defensive carry point of view, mind reading can be both an intuitive safety mechanism--spidey sense-- or it can lead to bald fear and poor decision making when we think we know that the other guy is going to do something, and we are wrong; the scuffy dude is an undercover cop.

At work, many people get into difficulty because they "mind read" their boss and determine that "he likes me," or "hates my guts," while real everyday interactions such as evaluations might not support either conclusion. School children similarly often entirely misconstrue what the teacher is thinking about them--- and usually she is too busy with stuff to be paying much attention to any one student whatsoever.

There is a very fine line between intuition, where we make good use of lots of facts, some of which we are barely conscious of if at all, and illogical mind reading.

I have no idea whatsoever what O or Congress are thinking about doing. My representative is pro 2 A. O has publicly endorsed Heller. Absolutely NO politician has gone on TV to propose a 500% tax on ammo or guns.

To be sure, a small and vocal minority have advocated for bringing back the AWB. We know what those folks are thinking. We don't know what the rest of the 535 members are thinking.

My guess, nothing much at all on this issue. They are too deep into the financial mess and the wars, and too busy positioning themselves for the election 2 years from now to pay this issue much attention.

How many Senators would realistically support such a thing? Lets see. CA, NY, NJ, IL, MA, Maryland. That is 1/8th of the Senate. Where would it be opposed? NH, MO, OK, NM, TX, FL, GA, Alaska, Arkansas, Arizona, at the very least. Probably, too in Utah, Colorado, both Dakotas, Alabama, Virginia and more. I think that is 40 Senate votes, enough to keep anything from going forward.

Guys, it ain't gonna happen.

[Gun Loving Liveral]

Even though I voted for Obama I am sure I will not agree with everything he does or proposes. I have never agreed 100% with ANY politician. The reason I do not expect the 500% ammo tax is a matter of politics. Such a bill would spark VERY much debate in congress even with Democratic majority and Obama would expend a lot of political capital in pushing it through. He would push away any moderate Democrats or progressive Republicans and make enacting any of his ideas more difficult in the future. I do not know if he will be a good president (we never do at first, do we?) but he is for sure a smart politician and a smart politician chooses battles wisely. Choosing this as an issue to dig in his heels and push the legislation through would be a foolish thing to spend lots of time and effort on and most citizens want action on lots of other things first (economy, war, health care) and he would be perceived by many (myself included) as wasting time and energy. That is the main reason I do not think this likely. IF I am wrong, I will be in contact with my senators and congressmen forthwith.

[mr surveyor]

I suppose I, along with a few others are getting off topic again, but the question of "The Wun" pushing through anti-gun legislation, or new taxes on guns/ammo (which I consider the same animal as anti-gun legislation) can be partially answered by one of the latest edicts from "The Wun". That being in the form of one of the questions in his 7 page application to be a part of his wonderful, all American, administration.... (and I paraphrase)..."Do you, or any of your family members own, or have a gun in your home?"



Any Questions?



surv

[BAC]

Yes.

Have you heard, from the horse's mouth (read: from an accredited source like the source itself), that a politician has proposed any kind of tax increase on firearms and ammo?

Stop chasing ghosts.


-B

[5knives]

I'd like to suggest that anyone feeling comfortable with Mr. Obama's history and voting record (that part's easy, not much history there), as well as his past statements regarding 'Sensible Firearms control' might take a few minutes and look at the firearms laws in Australia, Canada and Great Britain.

Folks there were feeling pretty comfortable too, until it happenned.

Regards,

[jfl]

I don't believe we'll have an outright 500% tax on ammo.
80% today, then a 40% to a fund for the children then xx% to cover the cost of ammo registration, and so on.
Gun/ammo control has to be incremental to avoid an outcry ...
And that is definitely possible

[BAC]

Again...

Have you heard, from the horse's mouth (read: from an accredited source like the source itself), that a politician has proposed any kind of tax increase on firearms and ammo?

-B

[5knives]

History can be so informative, we should all read more of it.

Here's some of Mr. Obama's history.

----------------------------

* Voted to allow the prosecution of citizens who use a firearm for self-defense in the home (Illinois Senate, S.B. 2165. 3/25/04);

* Voted to allow reckless lawsuits designed to put America’s firearms industry out of business (S.397, vote 219, 7/29/05);

* Voted to ban almost all rifle ammunition commonly used for hunting and sport shooting (United States Senate, S. 397, vote 217, 7/29/05);

* Supported a 500% increase in federal taxes on guns and ammunition (Chicago Defender, 12/13/99);

* Voted to ban hundreds of rifles and shotguns commonly used for hunting, including single-shot, over-under and side-by-side shotguns (Illinois Senate SB 1195, 3/13/03); and,

* Proposed restrictions that would close 90% or more of all gun stores in the U.S.(Chicago Defender, 12/13/99).

---------------------------------------------------

Wow!

Wasn't that interesting?

Honestly requires me to mention that I did not vote for him. I lived and worked in Chicago or vicinity for over 40 years and I know what a Chicago Ward Politician is.

Mr. Obama was/is a Chicago Ward politician.

The country is going to find out what that means, and then we'll all know.

Some may not like learning it very much, but education is a good thing nevertheless.

Here's a head start on the course;

Chicago Ward Politicians lie whenever it suits their purpose of the moment, and when caught out, they deny everything and claim they were misquoted, misunderstood and never said that anyhow.

After a while you learn to ignore what they say and to watch what they do carefully, VERY carefully!

Honest!

Regards,