Apply background checks for gun purchases to voting

What is being referred to is a sales tax, which is charged on every single product sold within a state. It does not mean that constitutional rights can be made subject to taxes. Sales tax applies to computers and internet services, but that does not mean the first amendment is subject to tax.

The burden of proof is upon yourself to demonstrate that constitutional rights can indeed be made subject to taxation, since such is your argument.

 

Can you read?

Bill S.1298
SECTION 1. Chapter 29 of the General Laws, as appearing in the 2014 Official Edition, is hereby amended by inserting after section 2QQQQ, the following new section:-

2RRRR. There is hereby established and set up on the books of the commonwealth a separate fund to be known as the Firearms Violence Prevention Trust Fund. Amounts credited to such fund shall be available, without further appropriation, to the Secretary of the Executive Office of Public Safety and Homeland Security who shall utilize such funds to establish an annual municipal grant program to support municipal violence prevention programs. Provided that priority shall be given to programs that support the provision of school resource officers, programs to address youth exposure to actual and depicted violence, and training of police in handling incidents involving persons suffering from mental illness.

SECTION 2. Section 2 of Chapter 64H of the General Laws, as so appearing, is hereby amended by adding the following new paragraph:-

In addition to all other rates of tax provided herein, an additional surcharge of 4.75 percent shall be imposed on sales at retail of all ammunition, rifles, shotguns, firearms or parts thereof, as those terms are defined in section 121 of chapter 140, in the Commonwealth. All revenues received from such surcharge, together with any penalties, forfeitures, interest, costs of suits and fines collected in connection therewith, less all amounts refunded or abated in connection therewith, all as determined by the commissioner of revenue according to his best information and belief, shall be credited to the Firearms Violence Prevention Trust Fund established pursuant to section 2RRRR of chapter 29 of the General Laws.

 

Why not 475%? Why not charge a tax on ropes and knives?

 

I don't know, it wasn't my bill.

 

the proposal has indeed been read, but it ultimately means nothing whatsoever. Everyday in the united states, local, state, and federal governments engage in activities that are not legal for them to do in the first place. A city or state choosing to implement a tax on firearms purchases to punish innocent individuals for the actions of criminals, does not mean the action is either legal or constitutional. The district of columbia prohibited handgun ownership for over thirty years before the united state supreme court eventually ruled that such was not legal to do. The simple fact that it took more than thirty years for such to occur, does nothing to change the fact that it was still an illegal act in the first place. The same applies to the city of Chicago, and how the courts are continually rejecting each new proposal to limit legal handgun ownership.

 

Doesn't mean it isn't either.

 

I am not an american or a democrat, but I agree with the logic in the OP.

 

Which ultimately does not mean anything in this matter. Nothing has been presented by yourself that would amount to possessing actual legitimacy in this discussion.

 

Nothing has been presented by you to support your claim.

 

Why should I pay for the actions of criminals?

Do I get a rebate if I shoot an armed criminal?

 

How about a Vermin Bounty ?

Based on how much money is saved in the cost of prosecuting that criminal and Court costs and appeals,
you get 10% of that estimated cost.

Hows that ?

 

I think you're confusing use and abuse. As long as he didn't actually took anything out of context, no harm, no foul.

 

It is not the argument of myself that constitutional rights, and the legal exercise thereof, can legally be taxed by government on the basis of recouping monetary loss resulting from the illegal actions of criminal individuals who do not belong in society. Rather that is your argument, and the burden of proof is on yourself to demonstrate such.

 

That's semantics. We tax the right to own and bear arms in this country among other rights

 

Then actually demonstrate such. Show that there is an annual firearms ownership tax that must be paid each and every year, and which nonpayment can result in loss of firearms ownership rights as a result.

Once that is done, demonstrate which other constitutional rights are subject to taxation.

 

Is it ok with you if the right is taxed in a different way....or can it only be that way? LOL

 

Pray tell what nonsense is being discussed now? If there is an actual point to be made, then get to it, and cease dancing about the issue.

 

If the government makes you pay a fee is that not the same as a tax? In some states in this country you must pay a fee for the right to bear arms in public.

 

What fees? What states? Cite them. Demonstrate the validity of the statement being made on the part of yourself.

 

In states without open carry you MUST get a CCW to carry in public. That comes with a government fee. Lots of states are like this ....for example florida.

 

If someone does not pay the fee necessary to get a concealed carry permit in the states that still require one, are they prohibited from legally owning firearms under any circumstances?

Or is it actually being admitted by yourself that the carrying of firearms in public, for defense and not militia duties, is indeed a constitutional right held by the people?

 

The carrying of firearms IS a constitutional right. I have never denied that. Its a right which we can also attach a fee or tax to

 

It's the not infringed portion that gets you. A fee or tax cannot be egregious. BTW I was recently in your town. Sorry you missed the opportunity for a friendly drink. I haven't been downtown in a while but I have to say that downtown really rocks now. What a cleanup job. The strip is rapidly turning into the biggest tourist trap on the planet.

 

Downtown is the place to go. It was a dump when I first moved here.

 

Then pray tell why are more and more states moving away from doing such? The number of states allowing the legal carrying of a concealed firearm without need of a permit is increasing, not decreasing.