Illinois House Executive Committee Passes Ammo Tax and Handgun Registery Bills

This is a discussion on Illinois House Executive Committee Passes Ammo Tax and Handgun Registery Bills within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by Toorop On the flip side I don't want my tax dollars to further the outdoor sports. I would rather they went to ...

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 72
Like Tree28Likes

Thread: Illinois House Executive Committee Passes Ammo Tax and Handgun Registery Bills

  1. #16
    Distinguished Member Array Stubborn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Tampa Fl
    Posts
    1,530
    Quote Originally Posted by Toorop View Post
    On the flip side I don't want my tax dollars to further the outdoor sports. I would rather they went to hospitals. But in all honesty, I would rather just not pay an extra taxes. If people want to pay to further the outdoor sports or hospitals they should elect a congress person that will just raise taxes.
    Perhaps you should read up a little on the Pittman-Robertson Act

    Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act
    This Act, Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 669-669i; 50 Stat. 917) of September 2, 1937, is commonly called the "Pittman-Robertson Act." It has been amended several times, and provides Federal aid to States for management and restoration of wildlife.

    Funds from an 11 percent excise tax on sporting arms and ammunition [Internal Revenue Code of 1954, sec. 4161(b)] are appropriated to the Secretary of the Interior and apportioned to States on a formula basis for paying up to 75 percent of the cost approved projects. Project activities include acquisition and improvement of wildlife habitat, introduction of wildlife into suitable habitat, research into wildlife problems, surveys and inventories of wildlife problems, acquisition and development of access facilities for public use, and hunter education programs, including construction and operation of public target ranges.

    If you are against these things...I suggest to you sir, you may very well be on the wrong forum.
    msgt/ret likes this.
    "The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it".
    Thomas Jefferson

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    Member Array DocPMD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    241
    Not surprising. Illinois is flat broke and they're probably proposing all kinds of crazy stuff to raise money.

  4. #18
    VIP Member
    Array MrBuckwheat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Down Incognito
    Posts
    6,152
    Wisconsin is "Open for business" move up here.

  5. #19
    Member Array DocPMD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    241
    Quote Originally Posted by Stubborn View Post
    Perhaps you should read up a little on the Pittman-Robertson Act

    Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act
    This Act, Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 669-669i; 50 Stat. 917) of September 2, 1937, is commonly called the "Pittman-Robertson Act." It has been amended several times, and provides Federal aid to States for management and restoration of wildlife.

    Funds from an 11 percent excise tax on sporting arms and ammunition [Internal Revenue Code of 1954, sec. 4161(b)] are appropriated to the Secretary of the Interior and apportioned to States on a formula basis for paying up to 75 percent of the cost approved projects. Project activities include acquisition and improvement of wildlife habitat, introduction of wildlife into suitable habitat, research into wildlife problems, surveys and inventories of wildlife problems, acquisition and development of access facilities for public use, and hunter education programs, including construction and operation of public target ranges.

    If you are against these things...I suggest to you sir, you may very well be on the wrong forum.
    Personally, I'm not against those things. I'm just against the government (my tax dollars) paying for it.

    At some point people have to realize how out of control government has become. Sure, in the ideal world with endless cash reserves, why not fund such things. But that's not reality.

    I think it's a good idea for me to have an SUV to cart the kids around, a pick-up truck for carrying stuff around, a nice sports car to have fun with, too. But I don't because I can't afford it. Unfortunately, the government doesn't think that way.

    Illinois needs to cut programs to get their budget under control, not add taxes.

    Doc
    Tzadik likes this.

  6. #20
    VIP Member Array Hiram25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Wyoming, DE
    Posts
    10,969
    If that's what the residents of that State want, more power to them. We should send Bloomberg and all the other antis to Illinois, and dig a moat around it.
    Hiram25
    You can educate ignorance, you can't fix stupid
    Retired DE Trooper, SA XD40 SC, S&W 2" Airweight
    dukalmighty & Pure Kustom Black Ops Pro "Trooper" Holsters, DE CCDW and LEOSA Permits, Vietnam Vet 68-69 Pleiku

  7. #21
    VIP Member Array joker1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    3,052
    Thank you Lord for my being a resident of almost anywhere but Illinois, California, New York, New Jersey, Maryland, let's just say most of the northeast. Again, thank you.
    NRA Life Member


    With great power comes great responsibility.-Stan Lee

  8. #22
    Distinguished Member Array Stubborn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Tampa Fl
    Posts
    1,530
    Quote Originally Posted by DocPMD View Post
    Personally, I'm not against those things. I'm just against the government (my tax dollars) paying for it.
    At some point people have to realize how out of control government has become. Sure, in the ideal world with endless cash reserves, why not fund such things. But that's not reality.

    I think it's a good idea for me to have an SUV to cart the kids around, a pick-up truck for carrying stuff around, a nice sports car to have fun with, too. But I don't because I can't afford it. Unfortunately, the government doesn't think that way.

    Illinois needs to cut programs to get their budget under control, not add taxes.

    Doc
    Doesn't look like it really matters whether you're for it or against it. It has been since 1937.
    So at this point it's like two fleas arguing over which one owns the dog they're on.
    Last edited by Stubborn; March 2nd, 2012 at 06:20 AM.
    "The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it".
    Thomas Jefferson

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  9. #23
    Member Array DocPMD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    241
    Quote Originally Posted by Stubborn View Post
    Doesn't look like it really matters whether you're for it or against it. It has been since 1937.
    So at this point it's like two dogs arguing or which one owns the dog they're on.
    I think you may be missing my point. I'm not really wanting to argue about that particular example.

    My point is that some of the posters here are making the assumption that these new things being proposed in Illinois are all about gun control.

    I don't think that's the case at all. I think it's about coming up with ways to raise revenue. The legislature probably figures that guns and ammo are easy targets. I would guess it doesn't have anything to do with gun control at all - even though that's what they have to say to "sell" it.

    My other point, assuming my first one is correct, is that they are seeking to treat the symptoms instead of finding a cure. Treating the symptoms is adding/raising taxes. The cure is to stop spending money! There are tons of government programs that are good for people. Despite that, some simply are not necessary and need to be cut given our current economic conditions.

    Doc

  10. #24
    Member Array randian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    192
    Money is fungible. This tax won't result in a single extra dollar going towards the proffered purposes. It will all go into the general fund and be wasted.

  11. #25
    Distinguished Member Array Stubborn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Tampa Fl
    Posts
    1,530
    Quote Originally Posted by DocPMD View Post
    I think you may be missing my point. I'm not really wanting to argue about that particular example.

    My point is that some of the posters here are making the assumption that these new things being proposed in Illinois are all about gun control.

    I don't think that's the case at all. I think it's about coming up with ways to raise revenue. The legislature probably figures that guns and ammo are easy targets. I would guess it doesn't have anything to do with gun control at all - even though that's what they have to say to "sell" it.

    My other point, assuming my first one is correct, is that they are seeking to treat the symptoms instead of finding a cure. Treating the symptoms is adding/raising taxes. The cure is to stop spending money! There are tons of government programs that are good for people. Despite that, some simply are not necessary and need to be cut given our current economic conditions.

    Doc
    You and I are on the same page now. However I am one of those who believe this is gun control, the registration part of it anyway.
    There is absolutely no reason for registration other than future confiscation, as I wrote in my 1st post to this thread.
    A 2% tax on ammo is nothing, to any of us. It equates to 20 cents on an average box of 9mm and 1 penny on 100 rounds of .22.
    However if the wording of this legislation leaves the door open for the ammo tax to be raised to say 500% in the future or any other astronomical figure then this will also fall into the realm of gun control.

    If this were truly revenue collection, no new legislation would need to be passed, they simply raise automobile license, or driver license, or sales tax or property tax or any of the myriad of taxes we are drowning in.

    I think in Illinois, if they could stop the corruption and graft they would be far better off than they would be making spending cuts.
    Chicago has the reputation of being THE most corrupt city in America, and has been for more than 100 years.

    Now let me climb down off this soapbox before I fall and hurt myself.
    "The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it".
    Thomas Jefferson

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  12. #26
    Member Array DocPMD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    241
    Quote Originally Posted by Stubborn View Post
    You and I are on the same page now. However I am one of those who believe this is gun control, the registration part of it anyway.
    There is absolutely no reason for registration other than future confiscation, as I wrote in my 1st post to this thread.
    A 2% tax on ammo is nothing, to any of us. It equates to 20 cents on an average box of 9mm and 1 penny on 100 rounds of .22.
    However if the wording of this legislation leaves the door open for the ammo tax to be raised to say 500% in the future or any other astronomical figure then this will also fall into the realm of gun control.

    If this were truly revenue collection, no new legislation would need to be passed, they simply raise automobile license, or driver license, or sales tax or property tax or any of the myriad of taxes we are drowning in.

    I think in Illinois, if they could stop the corruption and graft they would be far better off than they would be making spending cuts.
    Chicago has the reputation of being THE most corrupt city in America, and has been for more than 100 years.

    Now let me climb down off this soapbox before I fall and hurt myself.
    I agree with most of what you say. I'd just like to point out that the state increased the personal income tax from 3% to 5% last year, a 66% increase. So at least that well is dry. That's why I think they are coming up with other creative ways to add revenue.

    I grew up in the Chicago suburbs, so I know all about the politics in the area. The corruption is a tough nut to crack. And keep in mind that they now have one of their own in the White House.

  13. #27
    Distinguished Member Array DontTreadOnI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,442
    Quote Originally Posted by Hiram25 View Post
    We should send Bloomberg and all the other antis to Illinois, and dig a moat around it.
    Hey how hard do you think it would be to get an electrical current in that moat? Maybe some rubberized sharks with laser beams too?
    If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

  14. #28
    Distinguished Member Array Toorop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Midwest Area to be Precise.
    Posts
    1,231
    Quote Originally Posted by Stubborn View Post
    Perhaps you should read up a little on the Pittman-Robertson Act

    Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act
    This Act, Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 669-669i; 50 Stat. 917) of September 2, 1937, is commonly called the "Pittman-Robertson Act." It has been amended several times, and provides Federal aid to States for management and restoration of wildlife.

    Funds from an 11 percent excise tax on sporting arms and ammunition [Internal Revenue Code of 1954, sec. 4161(b)] are appropriated to the Secretary of the Interior and apportioned to States on a formula basis for paying up to 75 percent of the cost approved projects. Project activities include acquisition and improvement of wildlife habitat, introduction of wildlife into suitable habitat, research into wildlife problems, surveys and inventories of wildlife problems, acquisition and development of access facilities for public use, and hunter education programs, including construction and operation of public target ranges.

    If you are against these things...I suggest to you sir, you may very well be on the wrong forum.
    I could care less if they use it for hunter education or public ranges. I would complain if they used taxes to fund a church or mosque or a theater for performance art and speaking. If you want a range, build it on land you buy. Don't steal my tax dollars to do so. And I don't care about hunter education for many reasons, the first being I don't hunt. Second why not have public basketball programs or baseball programs funded with tax dollars.

    I submit that if you like big government taxing the people to support private and pet interests as well as more government taxes, then you are in the wrong forum.
    bolocanolo likes this.

  15. #29
    VIP Member
    Array oneshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    +42.893612,-082.710236 , Mi.
    Posts
    7,916
    Sorry to Hi-jack the thread, but some things need pointing out;

    Quote Originally Posted by Toorop View Post
    On the flip side I don't want my tax dollars to further the outdoor sports. I would rather they went to hospitals. But in all honesty, I would rather just not pay an extra taxes. If people want to pay to further the outdoor sports or hospitals they should elect a congress person that will just raise taxes.



    ^^^^You should read what the P&R actually does before you comment.^^^^^^^

    It benefits wildlife, & their habitat, be it lakes, rivers, forests, marshes and even the quality of the air.

    It is funded mostly from SPORTSMANS DOLLARS, on the purchase of hunting licenses, ammo, firearms, fishing gear, Archery equipment, and so much more, as evidenced here :



    Shared Costs, Shared Benefits
    Federal Funding from P-R pays for up to 75 percent of project costs, with the States putting up at least 25 percent. The assurance of a steady source of earmarked funds has enabled the program's administrators, both State and Federal, to plan projects that take years to complete, as short-term strategies seldom come up with lasting solutions where living creatures are involved.

    In the more than 50 years since P-R began, over $2 billion in Federal excise taxes has been matched by more than $500 million in State funds (chiefly from hunting license fees) for wildlife restoration. Benefits to the economy have been equally impressive. National surveys show that hunters now spend some $10 billion every year on equipment and trips. Non-hunting nature lovers spend even larger sums to enjoy wildlife, on travel and on items that range from bird food to binoculars, from special footwear to camera equipment. Areas famous for their wildlife have directly benefited from this spending, but so have sporting goods and outdoor equipment manufacturers, distributors and dealers. Thousands of jobs have been created.

    Taken from here:; Fish and Wildlife Service | Southeast Region



    And;

    Non-Hunters and Non-Game Benefit, TooAlthough Pittman-Robertson is financed wholly by firearms users and archery enthusiasts, its benefits cover a much larger number of people who never hunt but do enjoy such wildlife pastimes as birdwatching, nature photography, painting and sketching, and a wide variety of other outdoor pursuits. Almost all the lands purchased with P-R money are managed both for wildlife production and for other public uses. Wildlife management areas acquired by the States for winter range also support substantial use by hikers and fishermen, campers and picnickers. Wetlands for summer waterfowl nesting are useful to nature lovers in other seasons. Recent estimates indicate about 70 percent of the people using these areas are not hunting, and in some localities the ratio may go as high as 95 percent.

    Numerous non-game species enjoy P-R benefits, too. Ground cover for game birds is also used by all sorts of other birds and small animals. Bald eagles benefit significantly under careful management of forested areas where they typically nest. Fortunately, the Pittman-Robertson act does not restrict use of funds to game species, but instead allows their use for any species of wild bird or mammal.



    As far as the Ill. assembly,
    Circus clowns do not have a thing on these buffoons
    bolocanolo and msgt/ret like this.
    If you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans.

    Washington didn't use his freedom of speech to defeat the British, He shot them!

    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." -- Ernest Benn

  16. #30
    VIP Member
    Array oneshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    +42.893612,-082.710236 , Mi.
    Posts
    7,916
    Quote Originally Posted by Toorop View Post
    I could care less if they use it for hunter education or public ranges. I would complain if they used taxes to fund a church or mosque or a theater for performance art and speaking. If you want a range, build it on land you buy. Don't steal my tax dollars to do so. And I don't care about hunter education for many reasons, the first being I don't hunt. Second why not have public basketball programs or baseball programs funded with tax dollars.

    I submit that if you like big government taxing the people to support private and pet interests as well as more government taxes, then you are in the wrong forum.
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    You really need to button your lip, and GO READ WHAT THE P&R DOES, not assume what you think it does.


    It takes money from a certain special group, (shooters, sportsmen & women from bird watching to hunters, fishermen, and it improves wildlife, funds studies to better understand them, and so forth.
    You should go read it.
    Stubborn, bolocanolo and msgt/ret like this.
    If you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans.

    Washington didn't use his freedom of speech to defeat the British, He shot them!

    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." -- Ernest Benn

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

hb5831 and hb5167
,
house bill 5831
,
il hb 5831
,

il hb5831

,

illinois ammo tax

,

illinois gun tax

,
illinois gun tax passes
,

illinois handgun tax

,

illinois hb 5831

,

illinois hb5831

,

illinois house bill 5831

,
illinois house executive committee passed hb5831 and hb5167
,
status of illinois hb5831
,
toorop gun forum
,
when will illinois hb5831 and hb5167 become active
Click on a term to search for related topics.