Posted on Aug 11, 2015
Seattle to tax guns and bullets. Is this an option to slow down gun violence which will work?
7.63K
72
63
5
5
0
Is this the answer to help eliminate gun violence, or is it for raising money for the city coffers? You decide!
The City Council unanimously passed a special tax on Monday, and Mayor Ed Murray signaled his support for the measure. The new law will impose a $25 tax on guns and a 5-cent tax on bullets sold within the city limits. Lawmakers called it a "gun violence tax" because proceeds would be used for prevention and research programs to reduce gun violence in Seattle.
The law is based on a similar $25 gun tax that passed in Cook County, Illinois, in 2013. The Seattle budget office estimates the law will raise $300,000 to $500,000 a year.
http://money.cnn.com/2015/08/11/news/economy/seattle-gun-tax/index.html?iid=ob_homepage_deskrecommended_pool&iid=obnetwork
The City Council unanimously passed a special tax on Monday, and Mayor Ed Murray signaled his support for the measure. The new law will impose a $25 tax on guns and a 5-cent tax on bullets sold within the city limits. Lawmakers called it a "gun violence tax" because proceeds would be used for prevention and research programs to reduce gun violence in Seattle.
The law is based on a similar $25 gun tax that passed in Cook County, Illinois, in 2013. The Seattle budget office estimates the law will raise $300,000 to $500,000 a year.
http://money.cnn.com/2015/08/11/news/economy/seattle-gun-tax/index.html?iid=ob_homepage_deskrecommended_pool&iid=obnetwork
Crime
Seattle
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 26
1
1
0
No it's not. It's an attempt to force gun owners to give up their guns by taxing legal gun owners.
(1)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
SSgt Alex Robinson, it's one of the cheapest tricks trying to be played on legal gun owners. It won't work.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
Sounds like another poor attempt at an end around the second amendment to me.....
(1)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
SFC Everett Oliver, That's exactly what it is, but I don't think it will fly very long. When they wake up and realize their fine citizens are buying out of town, they'll find another way to get money.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Why buy guns inside the city then? People will just buy their ammo outside the city, and guns as well if they can.
In turn, because they estimated how much revenue they would receive they will increase the tax to compensate, because they didn't make it.
In turn, because they estimated how much revenue they would receive they will increase the tax to compensate, because they didn't make it.
(1)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS, But, the article wrote that it was to help curb gun violence. I'm being a smart as now. That was probably the reason for the initial proposal, but the real reason is for more revenue. It would be nice if it worked for both of the reasons but, like you wrote, people will buy ammo and guns in another city, and then taxes will have to be raised if they want to continue getting the revenue.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
SGT (Join to see) Like my proposed 6 step program this will probably generate some revenue, but like have most said will it decrease violence. Even those who acquire a weapon for the right reasons can become criminals in the future or those weapons can get in the wrong hands if not properly safeguarded and used to commit a crime. I would love to see what the program does statically 2 years from now
(1)
(0)
(1)
(0)
COL Mikel J. Burroughs
Cpl Dennis F. I did copy and past the discussion that I posted earlier for you to take a look at. I believe you have it now.
(1)
(0)
Cpl Dennis F.
COL Mikel J. Burroughs Thanks for the link. I can agree with all but a National database (registry). A National registry held by the government is 98% of the way to total Firearms confiscation and would effectively do away with the 2nd amendment rights for all intents and purposes. The rest makes sense and already exists in many many states although enforcement of these regs is often lax due to a lack of money, manpower and will.
(1)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
COL Mikel J. Burroughs, I think you're correct about a gun purchased for whatever reason, can be used in a crime by the purchaser or crook that steals it. The two week waiting period is a good plan but, it only works if the decision is made to not commit a crime or murder. If someone is intent on causing harm, two weeks isn't going to stop them. Hopefully though, they are plain everyday citizens purchasing a weapon for protection. If someone really wants to cause harm to someone else, they don't especially need a gun. Any weapon will suffice. Personally, I take my pistol with me everywhere I go, except to church. I especially take it to movie theaters now. It's a shame our country has come to the point of carrying weapons for personal protection, but that's the way it is and I don't see that ending anytime soon.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
5 years later... With the added advantage of hindsight: NO. But we already knew that 5 years ago.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google