Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Plan B: Taxing to Death the Firearms Industry

page: 1
14
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 01:14 PM
link   
Yes, there is always a plan B in place to get what they want one way or another. The ends justify the means all for the greater good (that they see fit).

Make it too expensive... sounds familiar...

If you can't ban it, tax it into being unattainable. As efforts to reinstate a federal ban on modern sporting rifles at the federal level fail to gain traction, lawmakers on Capitol Hill are looking for another option to get their gun control goals fulfilled with a little help from the IRS




The proposals range from the modest -- a proposed 5 percent tax in New Jersey -- to the steep -- a proposed 50 percent ammo tax in Maryland. The bills follow efforts to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines and expand background checks, measures that have had mixed success at the state level.

The taxes -- much like so-called "sin taxes," like those on cigarettes -- serve a dual purpose. They can deter buyers, while using the extra revenue for favored programs. In this case, the sponsors want to direct the money toward mental health services, police training and victims' treatment.

But firearms groups say a "sin tax" on firearms wrongly punishes law-abiding gun owners.

"If anything, gun owners ought to be getting a tax rebate for helping reduce crime," said Lawrence Keane, senior vice president and general counsel for the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

According to the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the firearms industry already pays out more than $4 billion per year in federal excise taxes. Why? Because they're a successful industry with loyal customers who can afford to purchase products and services. Should the government start overtaxing the industry, the overall revenue from the industry will fall due to fewer customers being able to afford firearms products. Not to mention, kill well paying jobs and benefits for those who work in the industry.


Make it expensive and make them hard to get, shrink the supply of ammo etc etc... Whatever.... the 2014 midterms can't come soon enough....

We've all seen what sin taxes on a local level... Business and money flood across the border into towns or counties without said taxes...

townhall.com...




posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 01:20 PM
link   
What the hell DOES "INFRINGED" mean anyways?
Oh crap what does the constitution mean anymore anyways.....................



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 01:55 PM
link   
The mid-term elections will not help. Our enemies are "on both sides of the aisle". Only one way to solve this now. Where is your line in the sand?



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 01:55 PM
link   
Tax the hell out of them.

Just opens up the black market for firearms just a little more.
I really have to get a lathe and a milling machine.



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by butcherguy
Tax the hell out of them.

Just opens up the black market for firearms just a little more.
I really have to get a lathe and a milling machine.
Guns are easy. Ammo will be the real problem.



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 02:22 PM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 


That's exactly what will happen. If prices really do skyrocket on arms and ammo, then people will simply start making their own guns in their garages, and backyards and selling them within their local community.

Good job BigBro. You just scared people into using unmarked, untrackable, likely poor quality arms because you thought it was actually possible to keep them out of the hands of patriots.

Freaking ridiculous.

We're going to scare our selves into a self-fulfilling EOTWAWKI, martial-law type of collapse.



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarthMuerte

Originally posted by butcherguy
Tax the hell out of them.

Just opens up the black market for firearms just a little more.
I really have to get a lathe and a milling machine.
Guns are easy. Ammo will be the real problem.

Not really.
Even without access to reloading equipment, powder or primers one can reload centerfire and rimfire ammo.



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 02:25 PM
link   
More divisiveness.

Tax law-abiding people in order to keep us safer?

Get real.

More pathetic displays from the government!



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 02:30 PM
link   
This sort of BS is why people don't trust the government. Just drop it already. Accept the fact that if you want to disarm Americans you WILL literally have to pry their guns from their cold dead hands.

Everything else you do is only pissing them off. Start counting the days after you think you won this one. It really is not worth it.



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 02:33 PM
link   
Wait, tax rebates for reducing crime?


Are you kidding me?

Look, I am not anti-gun at all...but giving people a tax rebate to be armed? Does this sound a little bat-S crazy to any other moderate-minded people?

I really try and stay out of this whole gun debate, but I had to say something about this.

Regular joes aren't trained to prevent crime. They may happen to stop a crime here or there, but giving them a tax rebate would probably encourage vigilante justice (which it appears most you support?)



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
The mid-term elections will not help. Our enemies are "on both sides of the aisle". Only one way to solve this now. Where is your line in the sand?


Exactly!

I used to have hope, and faith in this country, now I only have hope and faith in my fellow americans.

The .gov is absolutely useless to most of us, doesnt serve any but the already wealthy deyond measure, and has no intention of ever remedying the situation.

I always find a good old fashioned buttwhoopin to do wanders for ones priorities, not advocating violence, j am just pointing out somthing I noticed along my journey through life.



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 02:38 PM
link   
Double
edit on 11-3-2013 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by MystikMushroom
 


Who said anything about vigilante justice besides you just now.

I think the argument was supposed to simply counter the one FOR taxing law abiding citizens for owning something they are supposed to have anyways.

It is equally Bat S crazy to over tax weapons or ammo just because the government has a hard on for disarmament.

Especially during an economic crisis. We need those jobs and as many successful businesses as we can have.

Obama is pushing a private unconstitutional agenda against common sense and common good. He would rather see a bankrupt weapons industry and those employees in hard times rather than live and let live.

edit on 11-3-2013 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by MystikMushroom
Wait, tax rebates for reducing crime?


Are you kidding me?

Look, I am not anti-gun at all...but giving people a tax rebate to be armed? Does this sound a little bat-S crazy to any other moderate-minded people?

I really try and stay out of this whole gun debate, but I had to say something about this.

Regular joes aren't trained to prevent crime. They may happen to stop a crime here or there, but giving them a tax rebate would probably encourage vigilante justice (which it appears most you support?)


What is the difference between average joe stopping crime and the police?

Give up?

Less innocent people either beaten abused or shot!

I am quite funny I know, please save the applause until after the show.

Anyways you act like it takes a lot of special training or somthing, the police arent very well trained, or have you not seen the way they act in almost every large city in the country?



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by MystikMushroom
Wait, tax rebates for reducing crime?


Are you kidding me?

Look, I am not anti-gun at all...but giving people a tax rebate to be armed? Does this sound a little bat-S crazy to any other moderate-minded people?

I really try and stay out of this whole gun debate, but I had to say something about this.

Regular joes aren't trained to prevent crime. They may happen to stop a crime here or there, but giving them a tax rebate would probably encourage vigilante justice (which it appears most you support?)


The historical reason for the Amendment was so that two things could happen:
1.) Citizenry could be armed and ready in the event of the need for defense (personal, state, country) and preclude the need for a standing army. This was because of the fiscal burden imposed by a standing army and the threat from a standing federal army of becoming a tyranny. That is why the powers of congress are limited to maintaining a standing federal army for two years.
2.) The power of an army was to lie exclusively in the militia (organized by the state and manned by the people) and never be usurped by the fed, thus allowing the militia (i.e. the people) to defend themselves against a tyrannical federal government.

We're obviously past that point because there are federal laws regarding firearms (UNCONSTITUTIONAL because of "shall not be infringed") and the overwhelming power lies in the federal government. It's a hard concept to grasp for most people, the thought of taking up arms against a federal government, but that's how our system is built. I, personally, like it that way and feel like we not only have to stop these upcoming infringements, but we also have to backtrack and get rid of the old ones.

So although I understand what you're saying, it wouldn't hurt to start working back toward support for placing power in the hands of 'the people'.
edit on 11-3-2013 by lynxpilot because: my own idiocy



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
The mid-term elections will not help. Our enemies are "on both sides of the aisle". Only one way to solve this now. Where is your line in the sand?


Time to get rid of all of the old fossils(both sides) that are up for reelection in 2014. Including the former Maverick himself. John McCain. Fresh faces and fresh voices will be the deciding factors in 2014.



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 02:47 PM
link   
The problem is that even a small charge per gun/box of ammo will make a nice profit line in someones government accounts and when someone wants some money for a silly project they'll go and up that amount so that it will pay for it, its just like tobacco and once you hit a certain point of price people will just go into smuggling the stuff as it will be worth it and then you have a completely unregulated marketplace and you end up spending more than it would cost to just not tax it to enforce the laws which ends up stupid



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 


Not surprised.
This may be the end game that the Tyrant 0bama wanted after all.

He can use is semantics-fu and state he doesn't want to ban guns. But taxing it is the "sensible" approach.


I can't wait for more 3-D printers to come online.



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 03:14 PM
link   
That sounds like a great idea, lets also tax the hell out of abortion and electric cars.



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


The 3-D printers are only good for a few rounds of a gun, then they fall apart.

WHoopsies, nothing to see here. . .
edit on 11-3-2013 by nomnom because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
14
<<   2 >>

log in

join