Posted on 06/05/2022 7:24:31 AM PDT by apillar
Check out the boilerplate the left has used in the past - it will be AR-15s “and copies, clones, or derivatives thereof.”
They tax liquor and tobacco at higher rates. Impose tariffs on imports they want to discourage. The government uses taxes to guide policy all the time without falling afoul of the Constitution.
It infringes on the 2nd amendment in that it makes purchase of sporting rifles out of reach for most individuals (ie. what the law refers to as the unorganized militia). Probably infringes on the 9th amendment as well.
One single model. It does not infringe or impair their ability to purchase any number of other models of sporting rifles of other design from other manufacturers. Even the ones in question have not been banned, just made more expensive. Nothing in the Second Amendment says all guns must be affordable to all people.
Probably infringes on the 9th amendment as well.
Probably not.
Wow, you suck. Unbelievable that you support taxing a single semi like this. If you do one, might as well do them all and ban detachable mags too?
Show me 67 votes in the Senate that will support this and I'll worry about it.
Like every other piece of legislation that is going to come out of this, be it from the Democrats or the Republicans, it is designed to attract headlines and not solve a problem that is past being able to be solved to begin with.
It's not in effect, is it? It expired and there was no support to renew it.
What percentage was the tax on TEA, so long ago?
https://www.history.com/news/boston-tea-party-surprising-facts
Unbelievable that you support taxing a single semi like this.
Your lack of comprehension is duly noted because nowhere have I supported the legislation in question. Correctly pointing out that it does not violate the Second Amendment is not the same as supporting it. In fact I made my opinion of the law clear early on here - Link.
Next time you might want to check the facts first.
Selective taxes on brand names may be constitutional, but it’s not right. Hell, even tariffs are never this punishing that you support. To be a sin tax there has to be a ‘sin’, and owning a weapon just isn’t. If you even have the slightest inkling that it’s ok, you aren’t a conservative.
Because the intent of the tax is to “try” to ensure that the product is unattainable - which is an infringement.
These ideas that you and your fellow democrats come up with are pure fantasy propaganda meant to get you and your fellow democrats to the polls in November.
Better get your tar, feathers, and Indian costumes ready.
Nobody is arguing this kind of tax is right either. Just constitutional. The two are not the same.
Hell, even tariffs are never this punishing that you support.
Again, point out where I supported it.
To be a sin tax there has to be a ‘sin’, and owning a weapon just isn’t.
Depends on your definition of sin wouldn't it?
If you even have the slightest inkling that it’s ok, you aren’t a conservative.
(*sigh*) I guess I'll just have to learn to live with your disapproval.
You shouldn’t just sigh and be ok with it, you should be NO and HELL NO for supporting gun taxes. If not, then you earn your place.
Get ‘em while they’re hot!
The more they telegraph what they’re ‘going’ to do, the more gun sales there will be.
They have GOT to know this, and they have GOT to be making money off of it somehow, or they wouldn’t be doing it.
Increased Gun Lobby Donations to buy them off? Increased Gun Grabber Donations? Donations from the morons that actually BELIEVE anything a Socialist Democrat spouts? The money trail is there, I’m sure. These pukes don’t do ANYTHING for free.
5 more months of this crap and the Dems are pulling out all the corrupt stops.
I never said anything of the sort.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! The tards think that means Assault Rifle!!
Thats what started this in the first place. Call it BMF22
Molon Labbe
Yes, but part of the ‘Contract With America’ that brought the Republicans back to power in Congress in 1994 was that they would repeal the AWB so we didn’t have to wait for it to sunset in 2004. But noooooooooooooooooooooooooo. Once in power, they “regarded with concern” and “needed to evaluate” and then decided to spend a bunch of political capital trying to impeach Clinton instead of doing what needed doing.
“They tax liquor and tobacco at higher rates. Impose tariffs on imports they want to discourage. The government uses taxes to guide policy all the time without falling afoul of the Constitution.”
Irrelevant. Liquor and tobacco are sin taxes completely disconnected from any meaningful aspect of the Bill of Rights.
Guns produced domestically are not subject to tariffs.
“One single model.”
Seriously, you are on FR? Get lost troll.
“It expired and there was no support to renew it.”
LOL. President W Bush wanted to renew it.
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.