Long Island Shooters Forum banner
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
10,014 Posts
http://news.yahoo.co...3b943&bcmt_s=u#

NRA sues over Seattle's adoption of 'gun violence tax'

SEATTLE (AP) - Three gun rights groups, including the National Rifle Association, sued the city of Seattle on Monday over its adoption of a so-called "gun violence tax," a tax on firearms and ammunition designed to help offset the financial toll of gun violence.

The complaint was filed Monday in King County Superior Court by the NRA, the Bellevue-based Second Amendment Foundation and the National Shooting Sports Foundation, along with two gun owners and two gun shops. It called the tax legally unenforceable because Washington state prohibits local governments from adopting laws related to firearms unless those local ordinances are specifically authorized by the state.
"The ordinance serves only as a piece of propaganda, because the ordinance's mandates are legally unenforceable," the lawsuit said. "The state of Washington has the exclusive right to regulate the sale of firearms in Washington, and cities may not enact local laws or regulations related to the sale of firearms."
The Seattle City Council unanimously approved the tax this month, along with a companion measure requiring gun owners to file reports if their weapons are stolen or lost. The lawsuit does not challenge the reporting requirements.
City Attorney Pete Holmes has argued that the gun-violence tax falls squarely under Seattle's taxing authority, and City Council President Tim Burgess, who proposed the measure, echoed that Monday. He said the state Supreme Court has never interpreted whether the state's general pre-emption of local firearms ordinances includes taxing gun or ammunition sales.
"The NRA does this all across the country whenever they feel that anyone is trying to regulate firearms, and that's not what we're doing here," Burgess said. "We're using the city's taxing authority, which is granted to us by the Washington Constitution and the Legislature."

"We took a simple and commonsense measure to support gun safety research and prevention methods," he added. "It's not in any way an attempt to regulate the sale, use or possession of firearms."
Officials modeled the tax after a similar one in Chicago's Cook County, Illinois; the NRA said Chicago is the only other city with such a measure. Seattle's tax, which would take effect in January, would add $25 to the price of each firearm sold in the city, plus 2 or 5 cents per round of ammunition, depending on the type. The revenue would be used for gun safety research and gun violence prevention programs.
Between 2006 and 2010, there were on average 131 firearms deaths a year in King County, according to Public Health-Seattle and King County. An additional 536 people required hospitalization for shooting injuries during that time.
According to Burgess, the direct medical costs of treating 253 gunshot victims at Harborview Medical Center in 2014 totaled more than $17 million. Taxpayers paid more than $12 million of that. City officials estimate that the new tax would bring in $300,000 to $500,000 a year, but gun shop owners told council members those numbers were inflated. They said the law would cost them customers and sales and could force them to move out of the city.
This isn't the first time Seattle has imposed laws related to guns in recent years. In 2009, Seattle banned guns in city parks and community centers. The Second Amendment Foundation and the NRA successfully sued to block it.
"The city does not seem to understand that no matter how they wrap this package, it's still a gun control law and it violates Washington's long-standing pre-emption statute," Second Amendment Foundation founder Alan Gottlieb said in a news release.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,977 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,542 Posts
How do they collect the taxes from the gang members who are actually causing the gun violence?
I think they should actually collect the tax from anyone who does not own a gun. They are the ones who feel safer because of the tax.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,542 Posts
How about they tax (fine) the living S#@T out of the criminals that have committed the violent crimes? Pardon me... Administrative fees, like NY.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aquabach

·
Clinger
Joined
·
4,810 Posts
"According to Burgess, the direct medical costs of treating 253 gunshot victims at Harborview Medical Center in 2014 totaled more than $17 million. Taxpayers paid more than $12 million of that. City officials estimate that the new tax would bring in $300,000 to $500,000 a year, but gun shop owners told council members those numbers were inflated. They said the law would cost them customers and sales and could force them to move out of the city."

Let's look at this ...5 cents per bullet represents about a 15% tax increase on a particular item .... at best the "tax" will bring in less than 5% of what the city says tax payers pay for "gunshot victims" .. 5% does not seem very significant to me when you consider a portion of gun owners will stop buying ammo with in the city limits and the 5% is considerably less... what other measures has the city taken to "close the gap" ? ... Has the city added taxes on bars, restaurants or liquor stores to pay for the carnage drunk drivers cause?
 

·
Grand Poobah
Joined
·
21,090 Posts
"According to Burgess, the direct medical costs of treating 253 gunshot victims at Harborview Medical Center in 2014 totaled more than $17 million. Taxpayers paid more than $12 million of that. City officials estimate that the new tax would bring in $300,000 to $500,000 a year, but gun shop owners told council members those numbers were inflated. They said the law would cost them customers and sales and could force them to move out of the city."

Let's look at this ...5 cents per bullet represents about a 15% tax increase on a particular item .... at best the "tax" will bring in less than 5% of what the city says tax payers pay for "gunshot victims" .. 5% does not seem very significant to me when you consider a portion of gun owners will stop buying ammo with in the city limits and the 5% is considerably less... what other measures has the city taken to "close the gap" ? ... Has the city added taxes on bars, restaurants or liquor stores to pay for the carnage drunk drivers cause?
I have another really crazy idea.
Let people pay for their own medical care. Crazy, I know.
Lock up criminals and put them on chain gangs.
Bring back hard labor.
Cancel the cable TV subscriptions in prisons.
Get a felony conviction and you are no longer allowed to collect government assistance. Nor live in government housing.
If your baby momma takes you in she's out of public housing too.
Make crime, a criminal offense instead of a social justice experiment.!
 

·
Clinger
Joined
·
4,810 Posts
The fact of this tax is, the left is still attempting to link law abiding citizens to "gun violence" that is being committed by criminals ... as a side note it may push gun stores and gun owners out of "their city" and could just make a few bucks too... win ..win . But what will happen if the "tax" is upheld.... no taxes I ever saw went down or went away... What happens if the revenue is under the city's "estimate" ( which it almost certainly will)..they will undoubtedly raise the tax... it's the gift that keeps on giving.
But what really disturbs me is the burden that lawful gun owners or being shackled to pay taxes for the actions of criminals for the sole reason that the criminals used a gun. The connecting of a lawful act to a criminal act. Would a tax on cars be allowed if the proceeds went to preventing drug smuggling or human trafficking by auto ? What about a tax on the prescription drugs that are frequently abused, if the revenue went to drug rehabs.... the tax payers certainly pick up the tab for those conditions as well ... ... nonsense.
 

·
Grand Poobah
Joined
·
21,090 Posts
The fact of this tax is, the left is still attempting to link law abiding citizens to "gun violence" that is being committed by criminals ... as a side note it may push gun stores and gun owners out of "their city" and could just make a few bucks too... win ..win . But what will happen if the "tax" is upheld.... no taxes I ever saw went down or went away... What happens if the revenue is under the city's "estimate" ( which it almost certainly will)..they will undoubtedly raise the tax... it's the gift that keeps on giving.
But what really disturbs me is the burden that lawful gun owners or being shackled to pay taxes for the actions of criminals for the sole reason that the criminals used a gun. The connecting of a lawful act to a criminal act. Would a tax on cars be allowed if the proceeds went to preventing drug smuggling or human trafficking by auto ? What about a tax on the prescription drugs that are frequently abused, if the revenue went to drug rehabs.... the tax payers certainly pick up the tab for those conditions as well ... ... nonsense.
In all seriousness this tax has absolutely nothing to do with the reasons they are initiating it.
That's merely their excuse.
They want to make gun ownership more costly which is really the only time the left understands an economic principal.
Raise the cost of a product and less people will buy that product.
Raise the cost of doing business and less businesses will be in that business.
I just wish they would apply this principle to all of their pet projects where they ignore economics.

The goal of this tax is to make it harder on citizens and businesses to engage in what they do not like, driving them under or stopping people from engaging in gun ownership
 

·
Clinger
Joined
·
4,810 Posts
Aquabach- All true ...I have no doubt your points ARE the underlying reasons for the lefts activity..
My point is to merely illustrate that even the subterfuge they are using to create this tax is flawed,... lawful gun ownership has no correlation to "gun violence" , artificially links lawful gun ownership with criminal behavior ...would have no significant impact on the "gun violence" .. no significant impact to the cost, to the tax payers, of " gun violence" ....
The arguments to prevent this tax needs to be in the "reality of words" that the city used to justify the tax in the first place. Just picking apart and breaking(or is it braking) down their justification... it's easy ..cause it makes no sense.... no liberal logic stands up to analysis.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top