Surprise: Democrat Offers Up Legislation To Punish Law Abiding Gun Owners With Taxes And Fees

Rep. Danny K. Davis is looking to be in contention for Gun Salesperson Of The Year, because this is the kind of thing that drives sales

(Breitbart) Rep. Danny K. Davis (D-IL) is pushing legislation to place a 20 percent tax on guns and a 50 percent tax on ammunition.

The legislation is titled the “Gun Violence Prevention and Safe Communities Act of 2018.”

The act amends the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, so as to require a 20 percent tax on “pistols,” “revolvers,” “firearms (other than pistols and revolvers),” and “any lower frame or receiver for a firearm, whether for a semiautomatic pistol, rifle, or shotgun that is designed to accommodate interchangeable upper receivers.”

The act places a 50 percent tax on ammunition “shells and cartridges.”

These taxes will only apply to law-abiding citizens, just as similar taxes in Chicago and Seattle only raise the purchase price of firearms and ammunition for law-abiding citizens. Both Chicago and Seattle have a “violence tax” on the retail sale of guns and ammo, but criminals do not participate in the tax because they do not buy their guns at retail.

This ultimately means that such taxes drive up the prices for the tools that law-abiding citizens need for self-defense, even to the point of making firearms cost-prohibitive for poorer residents.

This is what Democrats mostly do: harm law abiding citizens. Make it hard for women to protect themselves from the criminals Democrats are soft on. And, ultimately, while this has zero chance of making it out of committee, much less getting approved, it will drive people to purchase guns they do not necessarily need and ammo which is just beyond extra.

Perhaps we should submit legislation that requires Congress members to pay for their own armed security, and we’ll put a big tax on that and for the permits and for the firearms they carry, along with the ammo for the guns.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

5 Responses to “Surprise: Democrat Offers Up Legislation To Punish Law Abiding Gun Owners With Taxes And Fees”

  1. Conservative Beaner says:

    Doing what communists do best.

  2. Dana says:

    Why do the Democrats hate poor people?

    After all, if the new taxes are designed to discourage the purchase of firearms, such would disproportionately attack those law-abiding citizens least able to pay . . . who, again disproportionately, just happen to live in the communities where the need for weapons for self-protection happens to be the greatest.

    If you live in Chestnut Hill or Rittenhouse Square or Society Hill in foul, fetid, fuming, foggy, filthy Philadelphia, paying a bit more for a weapon is no big deal, but it doesn’t matter anyway; you aren’t hearing guns and police sirens in your neighborhoods anyway.

    What’s that you say? Oh, you live in Tioga-Nicetown, or maybe Strawberry Mansion? Yeah, there you do hear the guns and the gang-bangers, and that’s where you might really feel the need to defend yourself, since when seconds count, the Philadelphia Police are just minutes away. Too bad, so sad, but that extra tax on defending yourself means you’ll miss a few meals, but, what the heck, at least you’ll be able to protect yourself, and you probably needed to lose the weight anyway.

    • Sarthurk says:

      That’s the whole idea! The democrat/socialist/commies (but I repeat myself)(it was a 3 round burst) want to keep everyone poor, and because you might be a gun owner or wannabe, you need to be persecuted even more. Alinski at it’s finest.

  3. Hoss says:

    Danny Davis is buddies with and an apologist for Louis Farrakhan, so you know that he’s a special kind of moron. I’m sure his constituency is just chock-full of productive citizens too.

    But, I do love when they think they’re making a point with their little stunts like this; it’s just democrat mutual masturbation.

  4. gitarcarver says:

    Courts have repeatedly ruled that if the activity is Constitutionally protected, legislators cannot restrict the “upstream” activities which would make the activity for all intents and purposes, null and void.

Pirate's Cove