Biden to impose $200 Gun Tax

Biden is playing into his ignorant base. For example:

He didn't finish by saying that the gun ban did absolutely nothing to reduce gun violence.



Additionally, if he really wants to reduce the number of mass shootings, then he should require that the media quit popularizing it every time it happens. The copycat effect has been well documented.

 

"Nicholas Giordano, a Professor of Political Science at Suffolk Community College, says Biden’s proposal goes against the constitution.

Biden argues that the National Firearms Act has been in place since 1934.

But the 1934 act and its tax only apply to when a gun is manufactured. Not to already possessed ones.

Giordano says this year’s lockdown and violent riots in cities across the United States made people across the whole political spectrum realize how important gun ownership is."
https://www.ntd.com/bidens-gun-tax-might-be-unconstitutional_531412.html

Another reason we should hope Georgia sends two Republicans to the Senate. This administration is going to stomp all over the Constitution and our rights. This would be a bill of attainder.

 

Once upon a time we had a tyrannical govt that thought they could bleed us for taxes and rule over us. Our founding fathers ran their asses off the continent and then created a govt based on our own Constitution which included the 2nd Amendment that still gives us the right to combat tyranny by acknowledging our right to own guns in order to resist another tyrannical govt. It also acknowledges our right to defend ourselves from crime.

 

Well the $200 tax was first implemented in 1934, which adjusted for inflation amounts to more than $3822. So essentially that's what people were paying in 1934

That is not accurate actually, when the National Firearms Act was first passed, it did not apply exclusively to newly manufactured weapons. In fact gun owners who modified already owned weapons into the criteria under the law were also made to pay the tax. Also, it has not been specified if what Biden is proposing would include weapons that are already owned

If a gun doesn't fall under the category of an assault weapon, that would also mean it is exempt from the $200 tax under this proposed update to the National Firearms Act. As for the two pictures you presented, it is important to note that assault weapons are not classified based on their appearance, but their function. Two weapons can look identical, but if they contain separate features (such as a detachable magazine) one might fall under the classification of an assault weapon, while the other does not. It has nothing to do with appearance

 

Thanks LogNDog.
I knew this, but in practical terms you are not going to take on the government in a military war. So you are down to wanting to defend yourself from criminals. Is it really necessary to have an assault rifle for this?
I was more interested in the psyche behind it. Is it a matter of not giving up your rights, or feeling part of a group, or just being American.
And do these desires outweigh the obvious downside of the mass murders carried out by unstable members of your society.

Basically is there any compromise to be had at all?

 

I don't think they have the prison capacity...

 

Can you explain your reply please?

 

To defend against tyranny.

 

Has anyone in the states used a weapon to defend against tyranny in the last 100 years?

 

He needs to keep up this nonsense because it will really help in the fight to gain those Senate seats in Georgia. Biden's an idiot. It's am impossible goal and to take a chance on giving the right yet another sound bite to use in that Senate battle is just stupid. I am so glad he is on the other side.

 

So, of the two rifles pictured, one will be subject to the $200 tax and registration, the other will not.
This brings an obvious set of questions to the necessity and efficacy of said tax and registration.

You cannot be more incorrect.
The rifles pictures the exact samne function.
--Exactly-- the same function.
One is an 'assault weapon' based completely on its appearance, the other is not; one will require a $200 tax to retain and transfer, the other will not.
Again, this brings an obvious set of questions to the necessity and efficacy of the tax and registration.

The 2nd Amendment see, modifies the power of the government to tax.

 

Nope, the federal classification for what constitutes as a assault weapon are:

• 
  
  
  To claim that two weapons that appear identical are classified differently based on their appearance alone is completely and utterly inaccurate
  
  
  
  

 

I remember when Obama was elected and the gun manufactures started the same ****..”he’s coming after your guns”....”their going to confiscate your weapons”....”they are going to ban(insert your weapon type here)”, and the best one...”they are going to limit or stop gun sales of (insert your weapon type here)”.

How many of you had your guns confiscated when Obama was elected ? Which gun types were legally banned from sale ?

 

"Shall not be infringed" is not THAT difficult to understand.

 

Nearly all school shootings have been committed by people with no criminal record, who would easily pass a background check, and will pay the fees to carry out their attack.

Laws can't fix everything. Neither does taxation.

[QUOTE="cd8ed, post: 1072238140, member: 55136"
Or America will eventually burn while teaching shooting drills in school and work like the third world country they aspire to be. We should get rid of permitting and mandate open carry for everyone also, including convicts. I am sure the gangs will enjoy military grade weapons.[/quote]

Actually, if everybody was carrying, wouldn't that be a deterant to those who wish to carry for nefarious reasons? How would disarming anybody prevent it, only the law abiding citizens will follow the rules and those are the ones you want carrying.

 

Holy deflection batman!

 

reality batman, Biden would need support of Republicans in Congress to get any such bill passed

 

Then don't make the register public.
Every firearm or shotgun is registered in my country and as far as I know there is no way for me to find out who is on the register.

 

And
"In 2017, handguns were involved in the majority (64%) of the 10,982 U.S. gun murders and non-negligent manslaughters for which data is available, according to the FBI. Rifles – the category that includes many guns that are sometimes referred to as “assault weapons”– were involved in 4%. "
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/08/16/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/

 

I'll take the professors word on it and remanufacturing a weapon to be fully automatic not just possessing one.

 

Because reloading a new magazine slows one down in dire situations. You're welcome.

 

The function of the two rifles I posted are identical; one was banned and was not -- so you must be wrong.
One of the rifles was banned because of its appearance - it has a flash hider and a bayonet lug, neither of which are related to the function of the rifle -- so I must be right.

 

So, you think Biden is lying about his desire to ban and confiscate rifles, handguns and shotguns.
Interesting.

 

As an Englishman, you should understand more than most. If it wasn't for guns. we'd still have royalty cruising around in gold carriages. The semi automatic rifle with high capacity magazines is the modern day musket that sent King George's redcoats back to the kingdom. Then they gave it another try in 1812. Same result, soundly defeated and haul ass back to the kingdom. Your government has nothing to fear from it's unarmed subjects. Our government has to disarm us to enslave us. Until they do, we're free citizens, not loyal subjects. This wasn't taken as a dig nor replied as one.

 

Yes. Google battle of Athens tn.....