CDZ Should guns and ammo be tax free items? Seattle's gun & ammo tax show why...

Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by 2aguy, Jun 17, 2017.

  1. 2aguy
    Offline

    2aguy Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    53,263
    Thanks Received:
    9,194
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +36,036

    And according to the Murdoch v. Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision...you can't tax a Right to stop it......and that is what any tax or fee does on gun ownership.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. 2aguy
    Offline

    2aguy Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    53,263
    Thanks Received:
    9,194
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +36,036

    The actual gun violence is in the poorest areas of our inner cities.... how do you pay for it.......you use tax money the way it is supposed to be used...for cops and firemen first......then decorative planters on Main Street......that's how......but Thomas Sowell pointed out if you want the vanity project and cops, but don't have the money for both....as a politician you pay for the vanity project...then...you go back and plead poor and that you need more money for cops....

    These cities have enough money for cops...they spend money on everything but cops....that is the problem...
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. 12icer
    Offline

    12icer Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2015
    Messages:
    2,221
    Thanks Received:
    373
    Trophy Points:
    170
    Ratings:
    +2,056
    The only reason to take or to limit gun rights is to exercise complete control over the people, and prevent them from removing you from office when you become dictatorial. It is a tool the liberals need to be able to force the people to accept their complete rule as dictators.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. Toronado3800
    Offline

    Toronado3800 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    4,206
    Thanks Received:
    322
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +560
    Ah, name calling.

    Us liberals think guns are allowed for reasons besides a militia being necessary because we look around at how the founding fathers enforced the laws.

    No any literal bible conservative reader of the 2nd amendment will tell you guns are only for those in the Militia, and a well regulated one at that.

    In conclusion, I suspect we nearly agree about gun rights. I just think if you can avoid the name calling and divisive comments people who don't like guns won't be soo motivated to go out and vote.
     
  5. 2aguy
    Offline

    2aguy Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    53,263
    Thanks Received:
    9,194
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +36,036

    No..guns are not just for the militia........
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  6. Divine.Wind
    Offline

    Divine.Wind Platinum Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2011
    Messages:
    20,473
    Thanks Received:
    5,438
    Trophy Points:
    420
    Ratings:
    +14,564
    Agreed.

    The 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution
    ....Implicit in the debate between Federalists and Anti-Federalists were two shared assumptions. First, that the proposed new Constitution gave the federal government almost total legal authority over the army and militia. Second, that the federal government should not have any authority at all to disarm the citizenry. They disagreed only about whether an armed populace could adequately deter federal oppression.

    The Second Amendment conceded nothing to the Anti-Federalists’ desire to sharply curtail the military power of the federal government, which would have required substantial changes in the original Constitution. Yet the Amendment was easily accepted because of widespread agreement that the federal government should not have the power to infringe the right of the people to keep and bear arms, any more than it should have the power to abridge the freedom of speech or prohibit the free exercise of religion.

    Much has changed since 1791. The traditional militia fell into desuetude, and state-based militia organizations were eventually incorporated into the federal military structure. The nation’s military establishment has become enormously more powerful than eighteenth century armies. We still hear political rhetoric about federal tyranny, but most Americans do not fear the nation’s armed forces and virtually no one thinks that an armed populace could defeat those forces in battle. Furthermore, eighteenth century civilians routinely kept at home the very same weapons they would need if called to serve in the militia, while modern soldiers are equipped with weapons that differ significantly from those generally thought appropriate for civilian uses. Civilians no longer expect to use their household weapons for militia duty, although they still keep and bear arms to defend against common criminals (as well as for hunting and other forms of recreation).

    The law has also changed. While states in the Founding era regulated guns—blacks were often prohibited from possessing firearms and militia weapons were frequently registered on government rolls—gun laws today are more extensive and controversial. Another important legal development was the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Second Amendment originally applied only to the federal government, leaving the states to regulate weapons as they saw fit. Although there is substantial evidence that the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment was meant to protect the right of individuals to keep and bear arms from infringement by the states, the Supreme Court rejected this interpretation in United States v. Cruikshank (1876).....
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  7. Uncensored2008
    Offline

    Uncensored2008 Libertarian Radical Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    64,689
    Thanks Received:
    8,291
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    Behind the Orange Curtain
    Ratings:
    +28,728
    Are milk, butter, cheese, and bread taxed, Herr Goebbels?

    Of course not, you are just flinging shit, as always.

    Now, would you like the defend the Seattle Poll Tax?
     
  8. Dan Stubbs
    Offline

    Dan Stubbs forget....Hell Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2017
    Messages:
    1,309
    Thanks Received:
    187
    Trophy Points:
    65
    Location:
    Fairhope Alabama
    Ratings:
    +985
    Many years ago they tried to pass a dollar a bullet and that bit the dust do to the NRA going to court, and now they are back trying to tax bullets like cigarettes and just tax them out of existence. Hope the NRS goes to court on this one.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. Toronado3800
    Offline

    Toronado3800 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    4,206
    Thanks Received:
    322
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +560
    Agreed.

    The point is us (you me, Divine.Wind) and a majority of people read that terribly written 2md Ammendment and LIBERALLY come up with the decision the right to own guns has nothing to do with the militia.

    That document was not written in Shakespeare's middle english. The wording just sucked.

    So, we look around at:

    -how it was enforced at the time
    -the spirit of the Constitution (restrictive, open, etc)
    -what modifications are necessary for the modern world

    and play a game where Reagan's judges didn't let me order an Abrams but he let me own a rifle.

    Not because he Conservatively read the Constitution but because he Liberally interpreted it (pretty correctly IMO).
     

Share This Page