Seattle Passes ‘Gun Violence Tax’
The Seattle City Council unanimously voted in favor of a new tax on the sale of firearms and ammunition Monday night as gun rights activists pledged to challenge the new law in court. Under the measure, gun owners must report any lost or stolen firearms. #Seattle votes to add gun violence tax @joselouis4077 @rinkydnk2 @Mrkauffman1951J http://t.co/vgRF1IqbZS…
71 responses to Seattle Passes ‘Gun Violence Tax’
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
mea_mark August 12th, 2015 at 11:08
Something overlooked here is that if you commit a crime with a gun that didn’t have the tax paid on it, or the ammo, you can probably also be charged with tax evasion.
Dwendt44 August 12th, 2015 at 11:29
Interesting idea. But I’m sure that there’d have to be a way of checking that gun or ammo was taxed as opposed to not taxed.
angry42 August 12th, 2015 at 11:41
and they can’t
Budda August 12th, 2015 at 12:43
Just for the record: are you a “second amendment advocate’?
mea_mark August 12th, 2015 at 13:34
I think he is a paid troll. New account, private, and using tor to hide his identity. Don’t expect him to be around for long. My guess he is someone who has been banned here before and is trying to sneak back in.
Budda August 12th, 2015 at 14:38
You are correct of course. Yet I still wanted to get him to commit one way or the other and play with him from that point on.
mea_mark August 12th, 2015 at 15:06
If he hadn’t been posting so much, maybe. Trolls that post like he was doing, create way too much work. If you are going to troll and you want to be heard, you shouldn’t draw so much attention to yourself and be a pain. If trolls were smart though and could figure this out, they probably wouldn’t be trolls. sigh … oh well …
The Original Just Me August 13th, 2015 at 09:36
A lot of work and then maybe he could be traced through his computer back to the hospital where he lives.
The Original Just Me August 13th, 2015 at 09:34
Guns purchased through a retailstore can be traced via the serial number. Ammunition not so much.
angry42 August 12th, 2015 at 11:36
No..it’s only at point of sale…
older guns or ammo or ammo from outside the city limits are not affected.
TuMadre, Ph.D August 13th, 2015 at 02:03
Not true. If you purchase your gun or ammo anywhere other than Seattle, it would not be subject to tax laws. Unless they have developed the technology to track each bullet to the store it was sold from, it isn’t feasible.
illinoisboy1977 August 12th, 2015 at 11:58
The tax actually DOESN’T fall under the city’s authority to tax, unless the state makes the tax for ALL products and not just firearms. Categorizing it ONLY for firearms and ammunition, puts it squarely under the state’s prohibition against locally drafted gun legislation. State law overrides local taxing authority. I don’t see this one standing up under judicial review.
angry42 August 12th, 2015 at 12:03
Was going to post something similar….interesting to see how this plays out in the courts.
wpadon August 12th, 2015 at 14:06
Here in Pennsylvania, Allegheny County has a “pour tax” on alcoholic drinks. This is in addition to the sales tax.
NRAlies August 12th, 2015 at 14:27
100% tax should be about right..
The Original Just Me August 12th, 2015 at 19:47
Use the old college funnel method. Chugalug, Chugalug. Makes ya wanta holler Hidee Ho warms your tummy don’t Ya know. . Chugalug, Chugalug.
KingSlayer.. August 12th, 2015 at 11:59
What do you call one black on the moon? Problem. What do you call ten blacks on the moon? Problems. What do you call the entire black population on the moon? Problem solved
angry42 August 12th, 2015 at 11:59
flagged
KingSlayer.. August 12th, 2015 at 12:00
not a fan of black astronauts?
angry42 August 12th, 2015 at 12:00
not a fan of racists…
KingSlayer.. August 12th, 2015 at 12:09
what?
angry42 August 12th, 2015 at 12:12
Your whole racist initial post which you have now edited…
KingSlayer.. August 12th, 2015 at 12:13
not a chance…wow man you are angry!
whatthe46 August 12th, 2015 at 12:29
he’s more than angry. lol
KingSlayer.. August 12th, 2015 at 12:31
i guess..it’s fine..can’t please everybody
Larry Schmitt August 12th, 2015 at 12:17
I think I detect a touch of sarcasm in his initial post.
allison1050 August 12th, 2015 at 12:57
It’s a nutter so just leave it alone.
KingSlayer.. August 12th, 2015 at 13:02
yikes…gotcha..thank you
allison1050 August 12th, 2015 at 13:04
Not a problem! ;o)
angry42 August 12th, 2015 at 13:13
nah…he made a racist post then edited it once called on it..
Jimmy Fleck August 12th, 2015 at 14:04
What will be funny is when the NRA gets a grant from this tax to help pay for safety classes that they offer in public schools for kids that want to learn to shoot.
NRAlies August 12th, 2015 at 14:20
Screw the NRA
The Original Just Me August 12th, 2015 at 19:42
Would that be with Right hand or Left hand thread ?
expatpatriot August 13th, 2015 at 07:21
If the NRA behaved as they did when I was a young teenager — and taught gun (actually hunter) safety — then they’d be a creditable organization. But they’ve been run by maniacs for years and are now more dangerous than organized crime or drunk drivers.
The Original Just Me August 13th, 2015 at 09:26
Bravo ! We do agree.
greenfloyd August 14th, 2015 at 05:20
CNN reports: “The Seattle budget office estimates the law will raise $300,000 to $500,000 a year.” That money will be split between, “prevention and research programs.” I seriously doubt any of it would go to teach kids how to shoot… that would require much more money.
Robert Kennedy August 12th, 2015 at 17:55
There should be a $50 tax on a bullet or anything for loading your own.
The Original Just Me August 12th, 2015 at 19:41
In my case of owning only revolvers, that would be a thumb tax.
TuMadre, Ph.D August 13th, 2015 at 02:01
That would just cause me to make my own bullets, unless you are going to start taxing gunpowder, tungsten/lead, or brass without regard to the uses. Nothing like having the excuse of an unreliable, home made bullet floating around every firearm violence charge.
The Original Just Me August 13th, 2015 at 09:25
This tax law is obviously STUPID. The City of Seattle has limits as to it’s jurisdiction. And that is at most a very few miles. Anyone who would want a gun for killing people could walk outside of the City limits obtain what they need and walk back. The city can not outlaw ownership or possession of firearms.
TuMadre, Ph.D August 13th, 2015 at 22:18
People also seem to forget that Chicago, the town with the most gun crime, also has the strictest gun laws in the nation.
The Original Just Me August 14th, 2015 at 04:08
Those people who have an Ultra Right Wing Agenda, pick and chose what facts and information they spout in order to justify their twisted and warped minds. Real and honest truth, history and facts are totally ignored.
TuMadre, Ph.D August 14th, 2015 at 04:29
I’m not by any means stating that right wingers aren’t without their share of picking and choosing, but gun control is more of an issue the left wants to push in the US, and left wingers can (obviously) be just as guilty about certain things.
I guess some would say that I’m further to the right than most (I’m Libertarian, which the left considers Republican-lite, but is in actuality simply against any more than minimum government control), but I always try to keep my views steeped in statistical facts. Comparing the US to other countries seems rather irrelevant, as those other countries have different ethnic makeups. The US is so vast and diverse, we can study better from looking into the result of the varying laws within our own boarders.
And, in the US, it is clear that the more gun control we have, the worse the gun problem is. Thus, in the United States, banning guns would only exacerbate the problems, from a statistical analysis.
Add 3D printers into the mix, and their constant drop in pricing combined with their increasing accuracy every single year, and one could argue that within a handful of years, no gun law will ever stop gun crime.
Taxing bullets will only increase the number of people making their own less-reliable munition, as you can not tax brass, lead, tungsten, or gun powder indiscriminately without it having a huge net-negative effect on the economy.
Guns are here to stay. The only question is whether you want the law abiding citizens to have one, or just the ones willing to break the law.
The Original Just Me August 14th, 2015 at 04:54
You and I are very much on the same path here. I own several different types of firearms, NO ASSULT TYPES, THOUGH,. I advocate open ownership and common sense use of firearms. As for this idea that the left is all for gun control and confiscation, I believe this grew out of some things several years ago. There were, no doubt, some on the left who did promote the NO GUN idea. But these folks were soon put down by their own party members. But, the idea was promoted and recycled many times by the True Propagandists on the Far Right as a publicity thing. Now, for the most part, that extremism seems to have been regulated to a very small portion of the Left side. I have posted that this whole Seattle thing is way over the top and is nothing more than reactionary extremism on the part of a few. It is for sure, this will be brought up in the next election cycle and will come back to bite the asses of these council membrs as it should be.
TuMadre, Ph.D August 14th, 2015 at 05:05
It seems our limitations MAY slightly different from one another. I am outright against civilians owning automatic weaponry, as well as any weaponry that can easily kill more than one person per pull of the trigger (including explosives and incendiaries).
That said, there are no assault weapons sold to civilians. To clarity what an assault weapon actually is (and not what people try to classify “Scary looking guns” as), I have found this link to be VERY informative, with plenty of citation to the definition.
http://www.assaultweapon.info/
The Original Just Me August 14th, 2015 at 05:27
As I said, I own NO assault weapons. We do agree again on this type of weapon in the hands of the untrained and uneeded. To me an assault weapon is just that a weapon, not all firearms are weapons. Assault weapons are thought of, designed for, and developed for one purpose only, to kill humans. These types of weapons are totally useless and are of total nonsense for any other kind of use other than killing people. Again, I own firearms not weapons. The purpose of use is the difference in definition.
TuMadre, Ph.D August 14th, 2015 at 05:34
I guess I am uncertain as to what you qualify as an “assault weapon.” Would you consider an AR-15 or a semi-auto AK-74 to be an “assault weapon?” Or do you qualify them as fully automatic weaponry?
The Original Just Me August 14th, 2015 at 06:02
Any rapid fire, large magazine capacity, rugged built, weapon designed solely for killing people and not competitive, sport, practical, or hunting use. The damn thing just throws a whole bunch of lead out there, anywhere. I think that pretty well describes Assault weapons.
TuMadre, Ph.D August 14th, 2015 at 06:33
I would mostly agree with you; with one caveat. Antiques. Of course, I don’t mean fully automatic WW2 guns lying around in people’s home, but just that there are guns that had a sole purpose to kill. I think that there is a lot of weight in those guns, and that they should serve as a constant reminder about how heavy and horrible war really is. If the owners are willing to remove the firing pin, or modify the internals to keep it from going fully automatic, I think that they should be able to, while keeping the weapon.
The Original Just Me August 14th, 2015 at 10:03
Awe, now collecting Vintage firearms is a whole different world. One of my Pride and Joy’s is a 1887 Side by side Parker Bros. 12 Ga. It is in very fine condition. Nobody today has the skill, knowledge, or patience to hand build such arms. But, I would never even think of firing todays shells in those twisted steel barrels. A long time ago, I was in ROTC. My drill instructor had us using M-1s. God, what a piece of crap those things were. I have never understood how our boys could carry those heavy monsters around all day. And the constant cleaning required. I had to use it to qualify on the range. That is the worst shooting I have ever done in my life. And I started at 8 years of age. Of coarse it was a WWII worn out surplus. My instructor was not very complimentary of me. That evening, I got my 1897 Winchester, long hexagon barreled 30-30 lever action. I got him and we went back out on the range. I drilled that Bulls eye 8 out of ten shots and the other two were within a 1/4 inch of it. That was with store bought ammunition and no prep or cleaning. He passed me. Yes, collecting Vintage forearms is fascinating but as you said, disable the full automatics.
The Original Just Me August 12th, 2015 at 19:40
A little over the Top maybe ?
Paula Blanchette August 12th, 2015 at 21:05
Mot over the top, not enough done.
Paula Blanchette August 12th, 2015 at 21:06
Not over the top. More should be done to stop the slaughter in this country.
whatthe46 August 12th, 2015 at 21:10
…
The Original Just Me August 12th, 2015 at 22:06
I do agree with you that humans killing humans is insane. But, as long as humans have been around, the slaughter has gone on. I think it was supposed to have started with some Dude named Cain. Taking away all of the guns in the world won’t stop the slaughter any more than outlawing knifes, baseball bats or lawnmowers. People will always disagree and if they disagree violently, they WILL kill each other. This is not to give up hope but guns are only a means and not the problem. Guns only provide one thing, killing by remote control, where as most other means requires face to face contact. I own several FIREARMS and Knives, but I own no weapons.
expatpatriot August 13th, 2015 at 07:18
To pretend that firearms and knives are equivalent in lethality is ridiculous. No one buys that, it even the people who say it.
You don’t believe it.
In the hands of the average person it’s extremely easy to kill with a firearm and very difficult to kill with a knife.
And most guns are in the possession of “average people.”
Larry Schmitt August 13th, 2015 at 07:50
The key difference is that guns allow someone to commit mass murder from a distance, thereby making it harder to prevent. Knives are a close-up weapon.
expatpatriot August 13th, 2015 at 08:18
That’s not all: the first physical expression of aggression is usually making a fist. And then things may or may not escalate.
If a gun is involved, and you make a fist — you’ve probably fired a shot. Guns are not only more long-range, but also promote escalation of aggression to lethality in microseconds.
The Original Just Me August 13th, 2015 at 09:15
IF the shooter does not get Buck Fever. For someone who knows what they are doing, a knife very seldom if ever misses it’s target.
The Original Just Me August 13th, 2015 at 09:11
Very true as I stated. Guns can kill by remote control but all other weapons require upfront and close contact which is much more difficult for most all people.
The Original Just Me August 13th, 2015 at 09:08
Well, I ain’t going to get in a big Hissy Fit with you But, in the hands of a well trained person, a knife IS more deadly than a gun. A K-Bar assault knife is fast, quiet, and extremely lethal. Now, on the other hand, a Bowie knife is best used for chopping campfire firewood. As for the average person, the untrained would more than likely prefer a big noisy gun that can easily miss it’s target.
expatpatriot August 14th, 2015 at 03:29
Almost no one is trained to kill with a knife. Whenever regular people try to kill someone with a knife, it’s always a messy, uncertain affair.
But even a hopeless incompetent can kill with a handgun if the victim is reasonably close and the magazine is sufficiently large.
The Original Just Me August 14th, 2015 at 04:02
You know NOT of what you speak. There are people who have been very well trained in the use of knives. They are different because they don’t go around playing little tin soldiers. they are the REAL thing and they keep their mouths shut.
expatpatriot August 14th, 2015 at 06:56
And out of 313 million Americans, these ninjas of the knife constitute what percentage? .1%? .01%? Less?
I’ll stick with “almost no one is trained to kill with a knife.”
The Original Just Me August 14th, 2015 at 10:29
Okay, you do that. good bye.
Merlin August 12th, 2015 at 21:22
Sheriffs in rural counties in Oregon have said that they will not
enforce the law mandating background checks as it will require a tedious
investigation for what would ultimately be minor criminal charges,
according to the Register-Guard.
Although “Register-Guard” sounds very officious it’s just a crappy paper in Seattle. They are just trying to follow faux’s lead hoping if they say something it will magically happen.
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.
expatpatriot August 13th, 2015 at 07:13
If all the law does is drive gun stores out of the city, that’s just fine.
Larry Schmitt August 13th, 2015 at 07:52
But if they move across city lines to a suburb, they are still available. That’s not a solution. It’s like relocating the homeless people.
amongoose August 14th, 2015 at 00:07
So how is a tax on a gun, which by the increased cost makes it harder to exercise your constitutional rights any different than a “poll tax” which restricted voting rights?
The Original Just Me August 14th, 2015 at 03:57
Very Good. You are right on the Mark.
greenfloyd August 14th, 2015 at 04:55
I don’t think this is going to help “reduce gun violence in Seattle.” It will anger responsible gun owners and feed the NRA’s “gun grabbers” meme. It will have no impact on illegal gun owners who are probably much more likely to be involved in gun violence and crime.