National Carry AcademyLet’s Tax Free Speech
October 13, 2015
Let’s Tax Free Speech
From the same city counsel member that has attempted to push bills that track ammunition sales, mandatory gun lock laws, and a ban on grandfathered detachable magazines that could hold more than the arbitrary allotment of ten rounds of ammunition comes a new bill modeled after a new Seattle gun and ammunition tax.
Paul Krekorian (there has been so much from this guy that I can actually spell his name without looking it up) is at it once again. Paul, in conjunction with another LA City Council member are proposing legislation that would tax firearms and ammunition is excise above already implemented taxes in an effort to “fund anti-gun violence” programs.
While one could easily compare this to implementing a tax on all cars sold to fund anti drunk driving programs, he is missing the point entirely.
In addition to increasing the financial burden of those who wish to exercise their Second Amendment and natural human right to self defense, these taxes are creating the mindset that the firearms to blame for the violence that criminals commit.
Paul is quoted stating:
While taxing the sales of firearms and ammunition will not prevent gun violence on its own, funding gun violence prevention programs could prove to be an initial step in creating a larger policy to save lives throughout the city and the nation as a whole… With the majority of gun related deaths being suicide or a combination of homicide and suicide, prevention programs may be able to reach those contemplating such measures.
First off, his statement alone is rife with maybes and hopeful ideology that scraping together a few million dollars from law abiding citizens will fund programs that will convince violent criminals that they should seek a more law abiding lifestyle.
Secondly, since when did it become acceptable practice in this country to tax a constitutional right that places unwarranted financial burden on the 99.999% of gun owners that make it through every day without commuting criminal activities with their firearms.
People say hurtful and deeming things every day. If you don’t believe me, spend more than 15 seconds on social media and you will see it for yourself. By Paul’s logic, we should implement a free speech tax that every American must pay each year to stem bullying and personal verbal attacks against our fellow citizens.
Think about it. If every American was required to pay $50 each year to exercise his or her right to free speech, we would get about $16 billion dollars that we could put towards anti-bullying campaigns and reducing the amount of negative language towards others.
Better yet, lets throw a $100 tax on all citizens if they so desire to utilize their fifth amendment right to avoid self-incrimination in civil and criminal lawsuits. That would be a great way of subsidizing the cost of courts in America.
How about taxing the fifteenth, nineteenth, and twenty-sixth to fund anti-discrimination cases in voting procedures?
Obviously, I am trying to make a point and do not believe that anything listed above should happen. Rather, I want to call out the fact that just because some people choose not to actively exercise a constitutional right does not give them the right to subject those who so desire to carry a defensive handgun to an unsubstantiated tax.
Let’s Tax Free Speech
October 13, 2015
Let’s Tax Free Speech
From the same city counsel member that has attempted to push bills that track ammunition sales, mandatory gun lock laws, and a ban on grandfathered detachable magazines that could hold more than the arbitrary allotment of ten rounds of ammunition comes a new bill modeled after a new Seattle gun and ammunition tax.
Paul Krekorian (there has been so much from this guy that I can actually spell his name without looking it up) is at it once again. Paul, in conjunction with another LA City Council member are proposing legislation that would tax firearms and ammunition is excise above already implemented taxes in an effort to “fund anti-gun violence” programs.
While one could easily compare this to implementing a tax on all cars sold to fund anti drunk driving programs, he is missing the point entirely.
In addition to increasing the financial burden of those who wish to exercise their Second Amendment and natural human right to self defense, these taxes are creating the mindset that the firearms to blame for the violence that criminals commit.
Paul is quoted stating:
While taxing the sales of firearms and ammunition will not prevent gun violence on its own, funding gun violence prevention programs could prove to be an initial step in creating a larger policy to save lives throughout the city and the nation as a whole… With the majority of gun related deaths being suicide or a combination of homicide and suicide, prevention programs may be able to reach those contemplating such measures.
First off, his statement alone is rife with maybes and hopeful ideology that scraping together a few million dollars from law abiding citizens will fund programs that will convince violent criminals that they should seek a more law abiding lifestyle.
Secondly, since when did it become acceptable practice in this country to tax a constitutional right that places unwarranted financial burden on the 99.999% of gun owners that make it through every day without commuting criminal activities with their firearms.
People say hurtful and deeming things every day. If you don’t believe me, spend more than 15 seconds on social media and you will see it for yourself. By Paul’s logic, we should implement a free speech tax that every American must pay each year to stem bullying and personal verbal attacks against our fellow citizens.
Think about it. If every American was required to pay $50 each year to exercise his or her right to free speech, we would get about $16 billion dollars that we could put towards anti-bullying campaigns and reducing the amount of negative language towards others.
Better yet, lets throw a $100 tax on all citizens if they so desire to utilize their fifth amendment right to avoid self-incrimination in civil and criminal lawsuits. That would be a great way of subsidizing the cost of courts in America.
How about taxing the fifteenth, nineteenth, and twenty-sixth to fund anti-discrimination cases in voting procedures?
Obviously, I am trying to make a point and do not believe that anything listed above should happen. Rather, I want to call out the fact that just because some people choose not to actively exercise a constitutional right does not give them the right to subject those who so desire to carry a defensive handgun to an unsubstantiated tax.