Possible Tax on ammo

[StukaJU87]

Not sure how raising the price of ammo, by instituting a national tax, will make anyone "safer".

If by "safer" you're using the logic of "if you raise the price of ammo enough so no one can afford it, thus rendering guns useless", your mistaken.

I feel raising the price will have the opposite affect. People will still buy ammo, they just won't buy as much. Buying less ammo will result in less training, which will lead to more problems down the road. That's like telling your kids that you can't afford to teach them to drive because gas is too expensive but it's ok because when the time comes, they'll just automatically know how to drive safely.

One of the most dangerous things is an inexperienced person with a firearm. If the government really cared about public safety, they would make ammo as affordable as possible and encourage gun owners to not only be educated and safe, but also to practice, and become familiar with their firearms, as much as possible.

Look at all the first time buyers spurred on by the hype. How many of them do you think actually bought more than a box of ammo? Of those that did, how many do you think actually learned how to use what they bought? Look at all the people that buy something for home defense and never learn how to use it. What do they think will happen if they ever need to use it?

I'm not saying I know the answer but I do know that making ammo more expensive will not make people any "safer".

Any thoughts? Curious to hear views from both sides.

 

[BarryLee]

Look at all the first time buyers spurred on by the hype. How many of them do you think actually bought more than a box of ammo?

Excellent point. I was at Academy Sports last week just poking around and folks were buying guns with no ammo. Now, I have no way of knowing how many were first time buyers, but some of the questions I heard made me think several were.

 

[MLeake]

Seems to me that back in the day, the government attempted to muzzle elements of the press by trying to raise prices/taxes on ink, and the courts ruled that restricting access to materials necessary for a free press was a direct infringement of the First Amendment.

I understand this would be used as supporting precedent for an RKBA lawsuit, should the government try to artificially inflate the cost of ammo, based on the same legal premise.

 

[BarryLee]

the courts ruled that restricting access to materials necessary for a free press was a direct infringement of the First Amendment.

I understand this would be used as supporting precedent for an RKBA lawsuit, should the government try to artificially inflate the cost of ammo, based on the same legal premise

What if they called it a “Trauma Tax” and used the money to fund Trauma Centers where gunshot victims are treated. While I still would oppose the tax it would seem they could argue that it was not intended as a punitive action against gun owners.

 

[Unspoken]

Safer? SAFER? You want to talk about being SAFER?
Sorry, I was channeling Herm Edwards.

Seriously though, they really don't care about our safety.

Incrementally broaden the power of the plutocracy...fund all the pork barrels...demonize an inanimate object & placate the cowering & huddled masses with billion dollar legislation...buy more votes. That's the scheme.

Didn't you already know, members of certain socioeconomic persuasions are way less suited to be firearm owners?

 

[MLeake]

BarryLee, it is a bad idea, and if they try it in any form I am quite sure we will see litigation.

 

[Woody55]

It will create bootlegging.

The government does not have to ban something to attract organized crime. Simply placing a high enough tax on the goods will do the same.

 

[chiefr]

Several points:
You are already paying for taxes on ammo. The US corporate tax is the highest in the world - average 39%. Plus franchise taxes, property taxes, etc. All added in which you pay when you buy ammo. After those taxes are added in, you pay sales tax.
Right now, some states & cities are considering an excise tax on ammo. Similar to the excise taxes on alchohol & Tobacco. This should be a concern for all. One more reason all of us who enjoy the shooting sports need to be vigilant and informed about what is happening at the statehouse, county, & city hall.

 

[zxcvbob]

There's already a federal excise tax on guns and ammunition; I think it's about 10%. It is supposed to fund wildlife and habitat conservation.

 

[UtopiaTexasG19]

Taxing ammunition to keep it out of the hands of crazy folks is crazy in itself. Does anyone really think that someone planning a mass shooting is worried about maxing out a credit card on ammunition that they don't plan on paying off next month is any real deterent? What non-sense.

 

[tygarys]

I was at Academy Sports last week just poking around and folks were buying guns with no ammo

Does Academy allow you to buy ammo with a gun? Some larger stores wont sell you a gun and ammo at the same time.

 

[jlr2267]

Does Academy allow you to buy ammo with a gun? Some larger stores wont sell you a gun and ammo at the same time.

The one in Greenville, SC does, in fact they always try to sell you some when you buy a gun

 

[Kreyzhorse]

Not sure how raising the price of ammo, by instituting a national tax, will make anyone "safer".

Make no mistake, the ammo tax would be used to make ammo so expensive that few can afford to buy it. Sure, at first the tax be low enough as to only have a small impact. Long term however, I have no doubt that tax would continue to increase until it put ammo out of range of most people.

They can't outlaw guns, but they can make them useless. Any step the anti's take is a step towards the endgame of banning all guns from the common people.

Without ammo, a gun is useless, and "safer". The antis are counting on people accepting a small tax as basically harmless until that tax now elimates the ability to purchase it.

If people can't afford to purchase it, stores stop selling it and then stop carrying it so even if you can afford it, you can't find it. No ammo makes your gun useless and thus "safer."

 

[Justice06RR]

If people can't afford to purchase it, stores stop selling it and then stop carrying it so even if you can afford it, you can't find it. No ammo makes your gun useless and thus "safer."

Umm.. not really.

If people can still buy overpriced guns and mags, they can still afford to buy ammo. You are most likely curbing a very small percentage of people who cannot afford them.

Its the same as taxing gas and cigarrete products. That has never stopped people from buying them. The tax would have to be so high that is almost the same price as the product itself.

Another ploy by the goverment to make money on the people without actually achieving anything.

 

[hagar]

It's one of the few industries booming, so a natural target for the dirty fingers of big brother. All for "our safety" of course, just like tax on booze and cigs.

 

[22-rimfire]

Who is proposing to tax ammo more?

 

[2ndsojourn]

Stuka

 

[StukaJU87]

I'm not proposing anything. I'm just repeating something I read in another forum.

I think Kreyzhorse hit the nail on the head. He litterally quoted what my father had told me 20 years ago. That the government knows its far easier to trick us into voluntarily giving up our arms without a fight than it is to risk a fight by taking them against our will.

Meaning, once people can't afford to use them, they'll gladly give them up.

Don't think it can happen? Look at the Patriot Act and how much power the American people gave the government for the promise of a little more security, ie. safety.

Wasn't it Benjamin Franklin that said "People that sacrifice freedom for the promise of security, deserve neither freedom nor security"?

Be careful what you agree to give the government, you'll never get it back.

 

[Skans]

The House would have to pass it, and I don't think the House is up for passing new taxes after getting their butts whipped on the expiration of the Bush tax rates.

 

[FlyFish]

There's already a federal excise tax on guns and ammunition; I think it's about 10%. It is supposed to fund wildlife and habitat conservation.

Yep, that's the so-called Pittman-Robertson tax, initiated in 1937 at 10% and currently at 11%. It's one of the relatively few taxes I have no problem with.