Once again with this trying to categorize me thing. I don't trust politicians with my Rights regardless of who they are. This country has shown plenty of times that politicians are willing to appease the will of the irrational masses if it means they can get themselves re-elected again and the logic and legality of that be damned. As most recently demonstrated by Governors allowing riots and chaos in their cities under the guise of "being sensitive to the emotional concerns of their constituents" while fining normal folks for having the audacity to keep their small business open to make money. And yes, by Trump banning bump stocks. Fact is that millions of Americans are afraid of guns whether their fears are rational or irrational is irrelevant. You get enough people kicking and screaming about something then politicians have to listen if they want to keep their jobs seeing how people vote them into office. And has history has shown if it comes down to Constitutional legality or keeping your job plenty of politicians have no problem giving the middle finger to the former. So no, I don't trust any politicians with my Rights regardless of what they say. Republicans could own 435 seats in the House and control all 100 seats in the Senate and have the Presidency and if they asked me to register my guns then I still lost them in the river last week. Do I trust Republicans MORE than Democrats regarding gun rights? Yes, do I trust Republicans regarding gun rights? Hell no.
The $200 tax is an unnecessary and ineffective restriction on the right to keep ans bear arms, laid with the intent to restrict its exercise - thus, a "biggie" Apply that $200 tax to abortions and you'll scream loud enough to be heard on the moon.
I dont think alot of people would find issue with a $200 tax if that's all that stood in the way of an abortion. Child support wreaks them alot more then that. Especially if the kid aint theirs. I know my babys mom wanted to abort no matter what it cost me, and prolly would have had I not promised to take my son off her hands.
There is a risk associated with anything you do; you need to assess what you stand to gain by what you stand to lose. It's totally up to you.
That does actually address another point. If they made the penalty so high just for not giving up your semi-auto guns, then taking it a step further (since you would already be in trouble anyway) and doing something like that, along with full autos and explosives would not matter much in the end, as they already made sure to ruin your life if you chose to keep your ARs.
That's not even necessary, most states don't have a gun registration anyway so there is no way anybody knows who has what unless they decide to tell you. Sure the government can try to mandate that you will register any gun purchased after X day but that does zero to figure out who owns the tens of millions of unregistered AR's out there. The sheer amount of laws that would have to be broken in order to figure out who has what would never fly in court even if a gun tax or mandatory registration happens to. Knock on the door Cops: "Morning, there is a mandatory gun registration now for all assault style rifles, do you own any? Citizen: "No" Cops: "May we search your house to verify your statement?" Citizen: "No" The end. Same deal with this tax thing being proposed. All semi auto rifles now require a $200 tax to own. Ok? There is literally zero way for the IRS to prove you own a semi auto rifle in order to withhold 200 bucks from your tax return unless you decide to claim it as per government request. And in all reality unless you get caught with it out in public or something there is no way anybody can know what you own. And even if you get spotted with one at the range or something by a "concerned nark citizen" then good luck getting a court ordered search warrant for both your home and your locked gun safe based on that. All of this stuff requires the good will of the people to just tell the government what they have, you ain't gonna find too many AR owners who would do that. A WHOLE LOT of people lost their guns in a boating accident if this nonsense ever actually gets passed and trying to prove otherwise will die in court in a heartbeat.
There is no penalty high enough that could convince citizens to turn in their ARs that would also pass in Congress or the Supreme Court. The punishment has to fit the crime and good luck trying to pass a law to where folks won't be like "meh Ill take my chances" and have it hold up in the courts. NY has some pretty nasty penalties for not telling the government about your semi auto rifles after their Safe Act and they still had an approximately 4% compliance rate with the other 96% telling Albany to go pound sand. And I'm talking Class 3 felony PER 30 round magazine that you get caught owning. People aren't tolerating that, you can't threaten folks into compliance you have to incentivize them. Only way to get any meaningful number of semi auto rifles out of the hands of citizens would be to offer up a massive buyback type program in the form of something like you don't have to pay any taxes for the next 5 years if you give the government your gun or something. Even a traditional buyback won't work well because most gun owners are smart enough to realize that they aren't about to let the government pay them for their rifles with their own tax dollars that the government collects against their will anyway. Unregistered guns were Pandora's Box, there is no putting the lid on that at this point I don't care what you do.
Trump banned bump stocks to appease the lefties. They had legislation far worse and the bump stock ban took their eye off the ball.
Ummm. Sure. Ok. Now, what’s the reason you want to tax ownership or give credits for non ownership. Is it to discourage ownership or to generate revenue?
What I want is more accountability. And a way for victims to be compensated. The tax, is a path toward that, even though it has little chance of passing. The industry has gotten a pass for its irresponsibility for far too long. Even banks are required to have KYC laws. The NRA had a chance to fill that roll, but failed.
Government ALWAYS wants to add taxes for the shortcomings of human behavior. It never changes a thing other than to grow Monster Government (who incidentally would like an unarmed populace)
Thats the whole point. Otherwise by definition you have anarchy, if we are jumping to extremes. One could choose life on the open seas if they dont like governance. But be prepared for pirates.
Does it make a difference? Case by case basis. Come up with an example of a victim that should be compensated. And ill see if i can play devils advocate.
No. Your idea, you flesh it out. The OP concerns semiautomatic rifles and standard capacity magazines. You’ve now claimed you are discussing the OP. So what victims do you want compensation for? Please be specific.
Like someone else that responded to you, the United Kingdom is reason why we are cemented in “cold dead hands if you want our guns”. First you all took the handguns, then you took everything else, minus allowing a few people a double barrel shotgun under the condition it can be taken at any time for any reason. Then you all started going after people’s knives. Then you all finally just said “F**k it, let’s do away with self defense entirely” by making any weapon you grab to defend yourself illegal by declaring it an “offensive weapon”. Now what you have is what I read about from time to time. You punish the victims who fight back, while referring to their attackers has harmless yobs and give them a slap on the wrist while the defender gets real jail time. And don’t get caught with a hammer in your vehicle...you might be a terrorist up to no good. All started with taking the guns first. And now that you are disarmed, they feel free to come to your home and arrest you if you gave a Muslim a sad on Facebook. I’ll keep my guns, thereby keeping my freedom.