Dems propose up to 50 percent tax on guns, ammo to fund research, safety programs

The Gun Violence Prevention and Safe Communities Act of 2018 would up excise taxes on ammunition for non-government users to 50 percent, while guns would jump to 20. (Photo: DOD)

A group of House Democrats has introduced a bill that would up the taxes on firearms and ammunition to pay for research on “gun violence and its prevention.”

The measure, H.R.5103, was introduced last week by U.S. Rep. Danny Davis of Illinois with nine co-sponsors. It aims to increase current taxes on guns and ammunition, as well as fees associated with National Firearms Act weapons.

Under the plan, ammunition would see excise taxes increase to 50 percent and firearms to 20 percent. Currently, manufacturers pay a long-running 11 percent excise tax on sporting firearms and ammunition under the Pittman–Robertson Act, which goes to fund conservation efforts such as hunter education programs, public shooting ranges and preserving wildlife habitat. The jump in fees under Davis’ plan would be set aside for public safety grants and research.

>
As soon as you get your case to the Supreme Court that the NFA tax is an infringement, you’ll have your answer.

In the meantime, the courts have always given great leeway to the government’s ability to tax.
>

Right. Cause, as you’ve pointed out, SCOTUS (let alone Fedzilla as a whole) is REAL good ‘bout adhering, following and enforcing the Constitution.

>The Obamacare mandate was ruled a tax.

Yes, decreed as XYZ; regardless of the actual TEXT, or the govt’s own words.

PLENTY of infringements, currently, yet THIS time, THIS bill....that’ll be the straw vs. camel’s back, right? *PFft*

Amazing how some around here wish to play w/in the artificial bounds when the opposition makes no such concessions.

RNC isn’t any better.
They had control of the legislature w/ Bush, after 9/11, and didn’t do anything to hold government to account, ensure/embrace responsible financial means/methods, or secure the border. (Arguably they’ve been against all of those, in practice.) With Obama, they proved themselves quite willing and able to just roll over for whatever new outrage-of-the-day/policy “the Dems” did.

It’s not (D) vs. (R) — it’s the ‘elites’ v. the common man.

I characterize the difference between Republicans and Democrats is that the former are useless — and have been as the first home for so-called “progressivism” as well as the party on no-repeal since Eisenhower passed on at least trying to restore governance by Constitutional means — whereas the Democrats are dangerous, as the home of Cultural Marxism (which trends towards national and civilizational suicide by design) and a Menshevik form of creeping socialism that now is as much fascist as communist.

“Useless” isn’t worth a damn.

But it’s somewhat better than “dangerous”.

And the disease that makes for useless and dangerous goes deeper than just the elites as both have hordes of their own brands of useful idiots.

In the case of Republicans you have the ideological heirs of No-Repeal Eisenhower who prefer Arbitrary government and who are also now way too frequently what I call Islamophobiaphobic ... which is why under W they STILL buried their heads in the is asses and chose to listen to the Muslim Brotherhood or CAIR rather than men like Stephen Coughlin (the push back against knowing your enemy as Sun Tzu advised did NOT start under Obama). In fact, the big tent Republicans may be thought of as Insert-Here-phobiaphobic in general ... unwilling to be thought of as bad people by the next bunch and their lapdog media.

In the case of the Democrats they are now starting to be openly opposed to whatever might result in a sustainable anything. Homosexuality and abortion aren’t enough so now they’ve embraced genderism, population replacement and Islamic migration (anything to be less Christian). They don’t commit personal suicide ... they try to make it so everyone else has put their necks on the chop with them. They are Insert-Here-phobiaphobiaphalic ... especially when it comes to Islam who have now moved ahead of even Poofters on the DNC’s seating arrangement.

“Useless” isn’t worth a damn.
But it’s somewhat better than “dangerous”.

I understand what you're saying, but I disagree.
The heart of the problem is that the Republican Party, as a party, stands for nothing.* (Sure it talks, and it likes to present itself as the good guy… but that's just talk & posturing.)

As you mentioned with their aversion to being thought badly of, they have no staying-power, this results in policies that are compromises — even when there's absolutes involved. For example, the 4th Amendment is absolute… but the Republican party is perfectly willing to 'compromise' on its restrictions, it's perfectly willing to have the NSA funded and operating domestic espionage. For the 5th, it's perfectly willing to allow the FBI to kill citizens without repercussion (ref: Ruby Ridge, Wako, LaVoy Finicum)... and so on.

Think about it — being 'useless' means that they will not be held responsible or accountable — this is the way that the Elites avoid responsibility and accountability. It's always someone else's fault. We see this in the way that they allow the Judiciary to run rampant and then claim there's nothing they can do.

* Nothing out of what they claim to represent, at least.

Interestingly enough: the Republicans have no problem being thought badly of by their base. This is especially true of te so-called “moderates”. But until the base doesn’t have the no-repeal disease too, so long as many of them think we should be getting along with the Left (and saving the world from Conservatives) they do indeed remain unaccountable.

As for compromises: just as compromise with evil is still evil, compromise with Leftism is still Leftism.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.