US Democratic Rep proposes 1000% tax on purchase of "assault weapons," std-cap mags

1
Bill link is not yet available.

This would price the dirty poor out of semiautomatic carbines with a simple majority vote, bypassing the filibuster. Police would be exempt, of course.

The Hill refers to the targeted firearms as "high capacity."
https://bluevirginia.us/2022/06/rep-don ... nciliation
https://archive.ph/Oa06V

https://thehill.com/news/house/3512671- ... e-weapons/
https://archive.ph/yMh4G

Re: US Democratic Rep proposes 1000% tax on purchase of "assault weapons," std-cap mags

4
tonguengroover wrote: Mon Jun 06, 2022 10:15 am There's going to be a run on high capacity mags as soon as this gets around.
Not in NJ. 4 years ago Trenton decided on the "Feel Good" law lowering the already-existing mag limit from 15 to 10 rounds. It's had no effect that I can discern on gun deaths in the Garden State except to turn anyone who missed getting a 15 round mag pegged into an instant felon (if caught). Why 10 rounds rather than 15? Who came up with "10" as the "magic number"?

Edit: I just checked NJ stats comparing gun shootings for March of 2018 (before the mag lowering) and March of 2022. Guess what? In March or 2018 there were 58 shootings and 16 deaths, but in March of 2022 there were 89 shootings and 19 deaths. March '19: 69 shootings, 9 deaths. March '20: 57 shootings 17 deaths. March '21: 90 shootings 12 deaths. So it's clear that the ONLY possible significant change has been a discernible rise in monthly shootings from before the lowering to now.

All it did was cost every legal gun owner in NJ to spend lots of money either getting their mags limited ($10-$15/mag) or replacing them. There was a surrender-to-police option, but not one single precinct reported such. However there was a rush on legal storage with FFLs (My dozen 15 round mags are stored until the SCOTUS decides on the Constitutionality of NJ's law).
"Rights aren’t rights if someone can take them away. They’re privileges. That’s all we’ve ever had in this country is a bill of temporary privileges."--George Carlin

Re: US Democratic Rep proposes 1000% tax on purchase of "assault weapons," std-cap mags

5
The murder rate was estimated to be 6.9 murders per 100,000 people in 2021 – just 0.5 lower than the 1996 murder rate of 7.4, according to FBI data examined by data analyst Jeff Asher and shared by the New York Times. It’s the closest the nation has come to the high-crime scourge of the early 90s.
In 2020 there were 45,222 firearms deaths in the US from homicide, suicide, accidents... And in 2020 there were 92,000 drug deaths, in 2021 it was over 100,000. Democrats and left leaning media obsess on firearms deaths, they just accept drug deaths as a reality of life.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: US Democratic Rep proposes 1000% tax on purchase of "assault weapons," std-cap mags

6
highdesert wrote: Mon Jun 06, 2022 10:43 am
The murder rate was estimated to be 6.9 murders per 100,000 people in 2021 – just 0.5 lower than the 1996 murder rate of 7.4, according to FBI data examined by data analyst Jeff Asher and shared by the New York Times. It’s the closest the nation has come to the high-crime scourge of the early 90s.
In 2020 there were 45,222 firearms deaths in the US from homicide, suicide, accidents... And in 2020 there were 92,000 drug deaths, in 2021 it was over 100,000. Democrats and left leaning media obsess on firearms deaths, they just accept drug deaths as a reality of life.
More importantly, on firearms deaths in schools, houses of worship, and supermarkets where it's "nice people" being murdered despite that it's only a several hundred of the 19,000 non-suicide gun deaths. But preventing drug deaths is NOT on the GQP agenda at all ( unless it's their own kin).

One side has no solution and no interest in gun deaths other than "thoughts and prayers" but the other side DOES have an interest and several solutions, most of which have no chance of working--AWB, mag limits. But BETTER background checking, BETTER Red Flag laws that punish bad-faith reporters COULD work.
"Rights aren’t rights if someone can take them away. They’re privileges. That’s all we’ve ever had in this country is a bill of temporary privileges."--George Carlin

Re: US Democratic Rep proposes 1000% tax on purchase of "assault weapons," std-cap mags

7
YankeeTarheel wrote: Mon Jun 06, 2022 10:53 amOne side has no solution and no interest in gun deaths other than "thoughts and prayers" but the other side DOES have an interest and several solutions, most of which have no chance of working--AWB, mag limits.
That seems like a stretch. One side has been on a decades-long crusade to ban firearms and accessories. Neither side has any interest in reducing violence.

Re: US Democratic Rep proposes 1000% tax on purchase of "assault weapons," std-cap mags

8
DispositionMatrix wrote: Tue Jun 07, 2022 8:39 am
YankeeTarheel wrote: Mon Jun 06, 2022 10:53 amOne side has no solution and no interest in gun deaths other than "thoughts and prayers" but the other side DOES have an interest and several solutions, most of which have no chance of working--AWB, mag limits.
That seems like a stretch. One side has been on a decades-long crusade to ban firearms and accessories. Neither side has any interest in reducing violence.
This.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: US Democratic Rep proposes 1000% tax on purchase of "assault weapons," std-cap mags

9
DispositionMatrix wrote: Tue Jun 07, 2022 8:39 am
YankeeTarheel wrote: Mon Jun 06, 2022 10:53 amOne side has no solution and no interest in gun deaths other than "thoughts and prayers" but the other side DOES have an interest and several solutions, most of which have no chance of working--AWB, mag limits.
That seems like a stretch. One side has been on a decades-long crusade to ban firearms and accessories. Neither side has any interest in reducing violence.
I have a hard time believing that Democrats want to ban firearms but don't give a fuck about the damage done with them. That simply makes no sense at all. What does make sense is they BELIEVE it will reduce violence, even when it probably won't. Why else would they want to ban firearms?
And please don't go into wild conspiracy theories that the Dems want some sort of socialstic dictatorship, because that sounds like MTG and Boebert.
"Rights aren’t rights if someone can take them away. They’re privileges. That’s all we’ve ever had in this country is a bill of temporary privileges."--George Carlin

Re: US Democratic Rep proposes 1000% tax on purchase of "assault weapons," std-cap mags

10
The people who want to severely restrict firearm ownership need to quit all of these little sideshow acts, and go straight for the underlying issue. They need to propose a constitutional amendment to repeal the second amendment, or to replace it with new wording. That is a can of worms I am sure they don't want to open, and they know it is a no-starter.

If they really want to change things at the national level, or even empower states to control things individually, that's what they are going to have to do.

Re: US Democratic Rep proposes 1000% tax on purchase of "assault weapons," std-cap mags

11
YankeeTarheel wrote: Wed Jun 08, 2022 1:02 pm
DispositionMatrix wrote: Tue Jun 07, 2022 8:39 am
YankeeTarheel wrote: Mon Jun 06, 2022 10:53 amOne side has no solution and no interest in gun deaths other than "thoughts and prayers" but the other side DOES have an interest and several solutions, most of which have no chance of working--AWB, mag limits.
That seems like a stretch. One side has been on a decades-long crusade to ban firearms and accessories. Neither side has any interest in reducing violence.
I have a hard time believing that Democrats want to ban firearms but don't give a fuck about the damage done with them.
We'll just have to disagree, then. I have seen absolutely no indication firearm owners are dealing with honest brokers in The Party with regard to imposing restrictions on keep and bear. Advocating too many conflicting proposals having nothing to do with safety, undergoing too many pivots on what they wish to ban, and decades of bleating about compromise while offering none when they have proposed takings have given them away. They're political animals with political goals meant to yield political benefits from some rank and file voters who might actually believe what they're being sold.

Re: US Democratic Rep proposes 1000% tax on purchase of "assault weapons," std-cap mags

12
Safer to say that neither side wishes to confront root causes.

DM has made the point elsewhere - and I tend to agree - that the text does not matter if the executive and judiciary decide it doesn't. Exhibit A, the 4th.

In a remotely democratic system, law and policy are collective agreement to follow the same norms regardless of whether we agree with them or not. The norms may or may not be congruent with the text used to delineate those agreements. Exhibit A, traffic.

Taxes are one of the easiest, most straight-forward, and clearly Constitutional frameworks for gun control activists to pursue. Whether or not they work at reducing violence is entirely secondary to the actual purpose of signifying progress towards reducing violence. The only way to avoid the imposition of prohibitive taxes is at the ballot box, through elected representatives. We had a revolution about it.

Strangely enough, taxes, registration, and more stringent background checks do seem to be at least somewhat effective if we look at the NFA - selective fire weapons, SBRs, and suppressors don't get used an awful lot in violent crime these days. It sure would be nice to have that paperwork go through as fast as a 4473 or CHL background check though.

Re: US Democratic Rep proposes 1000% tax on purchase of "assault weapons," std-cap mags

13
Introduced. Co-sponsored by 37 House Democrats.
https://www.businessinsider.com/house-d ... ion-2022-6
sbɐɯ ʎʇıɔɐdɐɔ pɹɐpuɐʇs ɟo ןןnɟ ǝɟɐs
ɯɯ6 bdd ɹǝɥʇןɐʍ
13ʞ
"ǝuıqɹɐɔ 1ɐ4ɯ" dɯɐʇsןןoɹ --- ɯoɔos0269ǝן ʇןoɔ
"ǝuıqɹɐɔ ʇuǝɯǝɔɹoɟuǝ ʍɐן sʇןoɔ" dɯɐʇsןןoɹ --- 0269ǝן ʇןoɔ
(béɟ) 59-pɯɐ

Re: US Democratic Rep proposes 1000% tax on purchase of "assault weapons," std-cap mags

14
I’m going to beat a dead horse, root causes. We’re not reaching enough people with our message. Perhaps, we need to start chiming in. I know it’s not cool to harp on this issues when victims are just being put under, but the reality is the opposition is not so polite. We should be less polite and let the politicians know. By the time legislation gets passed it’s a bit late to start bringing it up. Court cases are slower to happen and more expensive than addressing the issue when it’s current.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: US Democratic Rep proposes 1000% tax on purchase of "assault weapons," std-cap mags

18
It's an election year, but Beyer doesn't need to worry he represents a deep blue district across the Potomac in northern VA. I assume his co-sponsors also represent deep blue districts. It's all show for their supporters in their districts, it would never pass the Senate.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: US Democratic Rep proposes 1000% tax on purchase of "assault weapons," std-cap mags

19
highdesert wrote: Thu Aug 04, 2022 5:20 pm It's an election year, but Beyer doesn't need to worry he represents a deep blue district across the Potomac in northern VA. I assume his co-sponsors also represent deep blue districts. It's all show for their supporters in their districts, it would never pass the Senate.
Depends on whether proponents can get away with claiming the bill is not about policy. That will determine whether or not it could be passed in the Senate via a simple majority.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron