|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
Shoot down a 50 percent tax increase on ammunition
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 3 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Legislating a 50 percent tax on ammunition to decrease gun deaths in America is like forcing McDonald’s to double the price of a Whopper to prevent obesity.
While it’s admirable that State Rep. Jillian Gilchrest, D-Conn., wants to decrease gun deaths in America, she has sponsored a bill that, if passed, would have just that effect.
Gilchrest tweeted that “if increasing the tax on ammunition can prevent just one death, it's worth it.” |
| Comment by:
Stripeseven
(2/8/2019)
|
| Just more feeble attempts of elected servants trying to justify their jobs on the backs of the law abiding citizen. Disgraceful... |
| Comment by:
jac
(2/8/2019)
|
This is the third article with the misleading caption of a 50 percent tax increase.
It is not a 50 percent tax increase. It is a 50 percent tax. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(2/8/2019)
|
"A bill like this, which might keep low-income gun owners from purchasing the ammunition..."
Not MIGHT, but WILL. I understand the intent to be generous, but in this case it is not necessary. This law would, DE FACTO, keep low-income gun owners from purchasing ammunition. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| "Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times. We The People own those rights regardless, unless and until We The People repeal them. For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences. The Constitution is law, not vague aspirations, and we are obligated to protect, defend, and apply it. If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal. The Constitution does not furnish the federal courts with an eraser." --9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, dissenting opinion in which the court refused to rehear the case while citing deeply flawed anti-Second Amendment nonsense (Nordyke v. King; opinion filed April 5, 2004) |
|
|
