Posted on 01/07/2013 7:15:36 PM PST by BushMeister
Governments subsidize the behavior they want to see more of, and punish behavior they want to curtail. If liberals want to see people locking up their guns, then they should favor subsidizing this behavior.
I'm providing the link for a gun safe comparison website, in case anyone wants to use it do come up with other ideas.
(Excerpt) Read more at gun-safes.findthebest.com ...
The amount of the tax credit could be based on the cost of the particular safe. For instance, a Cabela’s safe that costs $1,200 would be eligible for a tax credit of $500. A $500 gun safe could be eligible for a $200 tax credit. Obviously, it would be ideal to have all homes supplied with a gun safe of at least a certain quality, but the economics will limit what many individuals can afford, even with a credit or voucher. Yes, even a dirt cheap Stack-On gun safe might prevent gun theft or illicit usage, but insisting on a certain minimal quality safe might be a good idea. Testing could be performed on different models of gun safes, with those meeting minimal standards being eligible for a subsidy.
When we consider how much money was wasted in all these “stimulus” plans for almost no real return, a goal of subsidizing the sale of 1 million gun safes over two years would be realistic, cost only about $300 million, and would place hundreds of thousands of gun safes in homes that would otherwise not have them. It’s hard to imagine anyone actually believing that this would not prevent the theft of thousands of guns annually, or that many acts of gun violence due to unintended access wouldn’t be prevented.
Would the left object to “subsidizing gun ownership?” Of course. But this plan addresses the reality of 200 million+ guns in America, which are not going away. This is the kind of sensible program that the Republicans can put forward to show that they are living in the real world, and want to partake in trying to reduce gun crime. If the Dems object, it will provide another bit of evidence that they are not primarily concerned with reducing gun crime, but with reducing firearms ownership.
Idiots.
It was tried in Canada, and then abandoned.
Criminals will always find a way to have a gun. Why impose on the honest law abiding people?
“Idots?” What are you trying to say?
Sorry, I misunderstood. Not sure if you’re saying that a gun registry was tried in Canada, or that it was mandatory to lock up firearms at home. I’m not saying to mandate anything, just to offer a subsidy for buying a new gun safe.
I want less government “help”, not more.
No Federal subsidy is “sensible”.
Well.... I “do” need a larger gun safe, lol. :)
This is a good idea. Even if it doesn’t pass, attaching such a tax credit to upcoming gun-control legislation could be an effective poison pill.
EVER!
Better to keep the government out of it. Sooner or later, everything they touch goes bad.
Like it or not, the Gov't is going to spend billions in subsidies each year. It might as well spend money on something that would actually make sense. And it does make sense, as it would prevent thousands of firearms thefts annually, and many unauthorized usages.
Bad idea. If you bought a safe, you’d have to report it on your income tax because you got a subsidy and they would then know you have at least one gun in your house or you would not have bought the safe. Or, the selling store would have to send a list to the government of those who bought a safe with the subsidy.
That would be the main reason for not doing that, however, I wouldn’t lock up my guns. Might as well drop dead now than have the bad guy kill me cause I couldn’t get the safe opened soon enough.
How about this, do away with the ban on fully auto and let Americans buy them at the same price the USG does.
No tax dollars required.
It’s not really even a subsidy. There should be NO tax on firearms or ammunition, no more than there should be a poll tax. Voting is a right , firearm ownership is a right and certainly ammunition is covered by the the Second Amendment, if it weren’t it would say we had the right to keep and bear blue steel and walnut clubs. In these days and times the No tax should be extended to gun safes for home and auto.
You’re part of the problem. A huge part.
Yeah...go ahead...take that deduction on your GOVERNMENT tax returns.
Then they’ll know EXACTLY who to visit first when the GOVERNMENT starts confiscating guns.
Nothing would have to be reported if ther was no tax on an item for anyone and the government is not involved. No federal, state or local tax on firearms, ammunition, reloading supplies or gunsafes. Owning firearms is a right and it’s none of the governments business unless someone has done something to lose that right.
ALABAMA 35 NOTRE DAME 0 mid 3rd quarter
ROLL TIDE GO BAMA GO SEC
WRONG!!
“They” need to get the shrink industry to cough up the names of the truly troubled.
For those labeled, they would have the right to challenge the diagnosis.
80% of these mass killers have been on psychotropic drugs.
I have more than one firearm and sometimes I’m not home and it’s prudent to keep the others locked in a safe. I have more than I can use at one time and some of them have specific uses so it may depend on what I’m doing or where I’m going as to which and or how many firearms I take with me.
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.