California Gov. Newsom signs law raising taxes on guns and ammunition to pay for school safety

The Second Amendment is, if I'm correct, the only amendment that is taxed and it's now about to be taxed harshly in California in the name of school safety. This is just another example of how liberal states are the states with the least freedoms. Guns and ammo will probably be purchased in Nevada and brought to CA and resold. Or gun and ammo stores just might get robbed more often.

Is anyone up for a tax on voting?

 

There is already a tax on voting — valid picture ID
Can you show where in the constitution that is allowed?

I think we should treat guns the same way we do voting. You have to register and there is a waiting period after you do so. You must actually maintain your registration or the local government might purge you. There can be no more stores authorized to sell guns than locations where you can vote.

Deal?

 

The Federal Gov’t has taxed ammunition since 1913, and it has faced numerous unsuccessful legal challenges, nothing new here, and how does such reduced “freedom?”

And you are correct, until there is something done to address interstate shipment of guns, the Iron Pipeline, easy access to guns will prevail, especially within the those areas with high levels of gun violence

 

Not enough, the key is to address access to guns, make it more difficult for one to obtain a weapon, now one can even get one on the Internet by just clicking on a box promising to follow all legal requirements. I’d rather see trading guns as we do vehicles, all the same type registrations and licenses to include liability insurance

 

In my state it costs $18 for a four year ID or drivers license, you can double it to 8 years and the price is less than double. What you call a tax on voting is something every American needs to fly on a plane, buy booze, make an in person banking transaction, get a hotel room and even enter our country. So while some folks argue an ID is a tax, others argue it's a necessity.

I checked the internet and saw that my city has maybe, emphasis on maybe, five or six stores that sell guns and/or ammo. There are more places to vote than there are places to buy guns and I'll be willing to bet most places are like that. Also, take note that with mail in ballots every mailbox is a voting location.

In the end, a person who desperately wants to vote will spend $18 every four years, a person who desperately wants to engage in 2A sports or home protection will have to pay significantly more.

On top of the above, having lived in CA for 21 years, it was always my impression that higher taxes need to be voted on by we the people. That's why CA resorted to raising fees on everything because they can do that, and they do it a lot, with a stroke of a pen.

 

It's always been my impression that when buying a gun through the internet the seller has to ship it to a licensed gun dealer and the buyer then has to go through the legal process of getting it.

 

that's been my experience

 

more harm is done by Democrat voters.

 

Every State that I have personal knowledge about, which ain't all of 'em, have free IDs available, so... You're at least partially wrong, potentially completely if that does include all of 'em. CA just predictably lost their case on so-called "high-capacity" magazines, and the 9th Circus now has 8 days to grant a stay or let it go, and while I suspect they'll invent law to overturn the District Court, once it hits the USSC, considering the District Court used the precise standards laid out by them in Bruen, regardless of what the 9th says, it will get and stay overturned and Unconstitutional, and a decision by the Supremes makes it apply nationwide, not to mention pretty much dooms all other gun control measures, especially including any sort of weapon bans (like attempting to ban semi-auto rifles based on cosmetics) to the same fate.

Gun Control in the US is more or less dead. Perhaps once those arguably more important precedents are set we can go after taxing fundamental rights.

Making it more difficult for normal, law-abiding people who will never shoot anyone (at least without firm justification) is not good public policy, not to mention in light of Bruen, as mentioned above, just about anything you can think of won't pass the Constitutionality test, so... Sorry. Also, whenever a gun crosses state lines, it has to pass through an FFL for a BGC (at least for now), though while I know with certainty that applies to pistols, I'm not completely sure about rifles, though I think it does, too. For now. Priorities.

 

It doesn’t matter what people argue is a necessity. It really isn’t
If it is required to vote and cost money then it is a tax

I think this shifts the more south you go

Correct

States rights and all that jazz

 

And you are entitled to your opinion
I disagree

 

Not if it doesn’t cross State lines and is a private sale, think of Craigslist for guns

 

How is taxing ammunition a “constitutional right?” Using the gun lobbies logic, show us in the Constitution where it states ammunition can not be taxed. It has nothing to do with “freedom”

If you buy that gun off the Internet in a private sale and don’t cross State lines it is legal as long as you promise to obey all relevant laws, think of Craigslist for guns

And the “law biding” logic is weak, nearly every mass shooter was “law biding” right up to the second he squeezed the trigger

 

He wants to know why picture ID wasn't required in 1776.

lmfao.

 

Already on the books in many states..

Not a problem here.

So another leftist assault on the free market via population penalties.. Thought thru like a true BLUE Democrat

 

Licensed gun dealer?
Thats pretty much everyone. The legal process is not stealing and simply paying the agreed price.

 

why should we give up any rights-what are you going to give us in return. I think people who want to post anti gun arguments pass a test on current gun laws and explain say the difference between closed bolt vs open bolt automatic firearms without being able to google it. If they flunk, then they are barred from posting their anti gun opinions publicly.

 

wrong-you need a federal firearms license to be a dealer. try again

 

and they protest when I claim their schemes are designed to harass lawful gun owners, not impede violent criminals

 

so you think that someone living in Cleveland can mail or UPS a Colt python to someone living in Cincinnati?

 

Which has requirements no different from whats required to simply buy a firearm. Anyone who has purchased a firearm may as well have the license, and most likely does since they shop online for them.

 

you have to pay the for license
you have to maintain records of what you buy and sell
you are subject to inspection without warrants or probable cause.
try again

 

I personally believe a picture ID should be provided for free (at least the first ID card, if it is lost that is a different issue), but totally support the ID requirement for voting.
The cost of the ID card is really a trivial expense, but it is the principle of the thing.

I would say that you are correct insofar as one law can set a precedent for another bad law.

 

Not if you only buy.
And if invetory goes missing, whats different from any other gun owner?

 

No, but they can obtain something they see on such as Armslist being offered by another in say Columbus, all they need to do is promise to follow all relevant laws and pick up the weapon in a private setting