\n<\/p>\n
Colorado has joined California in taxing Americans\u2019 Second Amendment rights with its new voter-approved gun initiative<\/a>. While proposals for similar taxes have ignorantly claimed they mean to reduce gun violence, this new Centennial State measure is unique in that it confesses upfront to being a revenue-generating scheme, using victim services as an \u201cends justify the means\u201d argument.\u00a0<\/p>\n A 6.5% tax on guns, gun parts and ammunition will apply to dealers and manufacturers that make at least $20,000 annually, excluding sales to law enforcement and active-duty military. The tax is expected to generate $39 million in revenue, which the state says it will spend on programs to support domestic violence victims and mental health services, with a small portion to fund school security measures.<\/p>\n According to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives<\/a>, Colorado has approximately 2,200 firearms and ammunition dealers, pawnbrokers and manufacturers operating within the state. Frank Sadvar of Northwest Outfitters says that while the \u201cway it was worded on the ballots, it looked really good,\u201d he suspects the initiative will fall short of its estimated revenue promises, much like most scams from the left.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cWe\u2019ve already got people saying, \u2018Well, we can run over to Utah or Wyoming instead,\u2019\u201d says Sadvar.\u00a0<\/p>\n Economists call this \u201cPigouvian<\/a>,\u201d a tax on a purchase that creates an additional cost for individuals not directly involved in the original transaction. In other words, when Americans purchase guns, we inherently create societal costs associated with the damage caused by owning firearms. Rosanna Smart<\/a>, a senior economist at RAND, co-director of the RAND Drug Policy Research Center, and affiliate faculty of the Pardee RAND Graduate School, likens this to gasoline taxes used to support infrastructure such as road repairs and initiatives to reduce pollution.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s not because you\u2019re a bad driver that we\u2019re taxing gasoline. It\u2019s because we need this money to be able to improve our infrastructure in ways that allow people to continue to use that product,\u201d says Smart.\u00a0<\/p>\n Unshockingly, Rosanna is not as \u201csmart\u201d as her name might suggest. The analogy fails for several reasons. First, every vehicle that uses gasoline to travel public roadways contributes to the wear and tear associated with keeping up the infrastructure. Can you imagine if this was the case with the estimated 400 million privately owned firearms in the United States? Trust me when I say we would know in a very severe way if it was. Only an infinitesimal percentage are used to commit violent crimes, and this has nothing to do with the gun itself and everything to do with its criminal use. Of course, we\u2019ve become accustomed to the left shifting blame to inanimate objects in support of their disarming agenda, while being seemingly impervious to the crime flooding through our borders and going unchecked in cities across America. \u00a0<\/p>\n The second gaping hole in this nitwit argument is that it conveniently sets aside the fact that the right to \u201ckeep and bear arms\u201d is codified in the Bill of Rights, not some bill of privileges. It is a Constitutionally protected liberty that \u201cshall not be infringed.\u201d Let me spell this out for the subversive and treasonous left. Shall not be taxed. Shall not be regulated. Shall not be restricted. Shall not be banned.\u00a0<\/p>\n You know what, though, I\u2019ll play along. If Democrats don\u2019t see these measures as a violation of the Second Amendment, they certainly won\u2019t see them as a violation of the First, right? I find it disturbing and destructive to speak of mutilating children in support of the trans agenda. Whoever discusses these matters, medical personnel, the media, or the average citizen, should do so with the utmost care and accountability. Red (American) states, listen up. Let\u2019s have them apply for a tax stamp. Pay around $200 per conversation, wait for approval, and then you may speak on the matter on the specified occasion. If you are caught having one of these conversations without a tax stamp, then you will face fines and imprisonment. Revenue from the tax could be used for mental health services for those with gender dysphoria.\u00a0<\/p>\n Let\u2019s ban talk of socialism and other conversations contradictory to the founding principles of the United States, or at least find a way to regulate or restrict them.\u00a0 Perhaps any conversation or publication containing more than ten sentences or any assembly involving more than ten people should be forbidden to regulate the capacity of such speech. Wasn\u2019t it the left who argued that words could be violence in the first place? And let\u2019s address publication. When the Constitution was drafted, the founders could not have foreseen film, television, still photography, radio, telephones, or the internet. It\u2019s time to dust off those Gutenberg-style presses if you want to disseminate certain types of communication.<\/p>\n I could do this all day, but you get the point. Until we can restore the rights promised to all Americans by the Constitution, I say conservative states should stop bringing toothpicks to a gunfight. Fight them back using their own rules. Surely, the left can not cry infringement of the First Amendment upon the same measures they enthusiastically and unashamedly apply to the Second Amendment. Expose them for the parasitic conspirators and treasonous subversives they are.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n
![<\/a><\/div>\nColorado has joined California in taxing Americans\u2019 Second Amendment rights with its new voter-approved gun initiative<\/a>. While proposals for similar taxes have ignorantly claimed they mean to reduce gun violence, this new Centennial State measure is unique in that it confesses upfront to being a revenue-generating scheme, using victim services as an \u201cends justify the means\u201d argument.\u00a0<\/p>\nA 6.5% tax on guns, gun parts and ammunition will apply to dealers and manufacturers that make at least $20,000 annually, excluding sales to law enforcement and active-duty military. The tax is expected to generate $39 million in revenue, which the state says it will spend on programs to support domestic violence victims and mental health services, with a small portion to fund school security measures.<\/p>\nAccording to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives<\/a>, Colorado has approximately 2,200 firearms and ammunition dealers, pawnbrokers and manufacturers operating within the state. Frank Sadvar of Northwest Outfitters says that while the \u201cway it was worded on the ballots, it looked really good,\u201d he suspects the initiative will fall short of its estimated revenue promises, much like most scams from the left.\u00a0<\/p>\n\u201cWe\u2019ve already got people saying, \u2018Well, we can run over to Utah or Wyoming instead,\u2019\u201d says Sadvar.\u00a0<\/p>\nEconomists call this \u201cPigouvian<\/a>,\u201d a tax on a purchase that creates an additional cost for individuals not directly involved in the original transaction. In other words, when Americans purchase guns, we inherently create societal costs associated with the damage caused by owning firearms. Rosanna Smart<\/a>, a senior economist at RAND, co-director of the RAND Drug Policy Research Center, and affiliate faculty of the Pardee RAND Graduate School, likens this to gasoline taxes used to support infrastructure such as road repairs and initiatives to reduce pollution.\u00a0<\/p>\n\u201cIt\u2019s not because you\u2019re a bad driver that we\u2019re taxing gasoline. It\u2019s because we need this money to be able to improve our infrastructure in ways that allow people to continue to use that product,\u201d says Smart.\u00a0<\/p>\nUnshockingly, Rosanna is not as \u201csmart\u201d as her name might suggest. The analogy fails for several reasons. First, every vehicle that uses gasoline to travel public roadways contributes to the wear and tear associated with keeping up the infrastructure. Can you imagine if this was the case with the estimated 400 million privately owned firearms in the United States? Trust me when I say we would know in a very severe way if it was. Only an infinitesimal percentage are used to commit violent crimes, and this has nothing to do with the gun itself and everything to do with its criminal use. Of course, we\u2019ve become accustomed to the left shifting blame to inanimate objects in support of their disarming agenda, while being seemingly impervious to the crime flooding through our borders and going unchecked in cities across America. \u00a0<\/p>\nThe second gaping hole in this nitwit argument is that it conveniently sets aside the fact that the right to \u201ckeep and bear arms\u201d is codified in the Bill of Rights, not some bill of privileges. It is a Constitutionally protected liberty that \u201cshall not be infringed.\u201d Let me spell this out for the subversive and treasonous left. Shall not be taxed. Shall not be regulated. Shall not be restricted. Shall not be banned.\u00a0<\/p>\nYou know what, though, I\u2019ll play along. If Democrats don\u2019t see these measures as a violation of the Second Amendment, they certainly won\u2019t see them as a violation of the First, right? I find it disturbing and destructive to speak of mutilating children in support of the trans agenda. Whoever discusses these matters, medical personnel, the media, or the average citizen, should do so with the utmost care and accountability. Red (American) states, listen up. Let\u2019s have them apply for a tax stamp. Pay around $200 per conversation, wait for approval, and then you may speak on the matter on the specified occasion. If you are caught having one of these conversations without a tax stamp, then you will face fines and imprisonment. Revenue from the tax could be used for mental health services for those with gender dysphoria.\u00a0<\/p>\nLet\u2019s ban talk of socialism and other conversations contradictory to the founding principles of the United States, or at least find a way to regulate or restrict them.\u00a0 Perhaps any conversation or publication containing more than ten sentences or any assembly involving more than ten people should be forbidden to regulate the capacity of such speech. Wasn\u2019t it the left who argued that words could be violence in the first place? And let\u2019s address publication. When the Constitution was drafted, the founders could not have foreseen film, television, still photography, radio, telephones, or the internet. It\u2019s time to dust off those Gutenberg-style presses if you want to disseminate certain types of communication.<\/p>\nI could do this all day, but you get the point. Until we can restore the rights promised to all Americans by the Constitution, I say conservative states should stop bringing toothpicks to a gunfight. Fight them back using their own rules. Surely, the left can not cry infringement of the First Amendment upon the same measures they enthusiastically and unashamedly apply to the Second Amendment. Expose them for the parasitic conspirators and treasonous subversives they are.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n\nSource link <\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Colorado has joined California in taxing Americans\u2019 Second Amendment rights with its new voter-approved gun initiative. While proposals for similar taxes have ignorantly claimed they mean to reduce gun violence, this new Centennial State measure is unique in that it confesses upfront to being a revenue-generating scheme, using victim services as an \u201cends justify the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":4412,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-4411","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-reviews"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/gunsandpride.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4411","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/gunsandpride.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/gunsandpride.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/gunsandpride.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/gunsandpride.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=4411"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/gunsandpride.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4411\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/gunsandpride.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/4412"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/gunsandpride.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=4411"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/gunsandpride.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=4411"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/gunsandpride.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=4411"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}](\"https:\/\/cdn0.thetruthaboutguns.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/gun-purchase_gun-store-scaled.jpeg\"){kind=link}