In the absence of federal action to limit firearms-related violence, Seattle is one of a few local governments looking at creative solutions to do so.Oh! So .. everything that follows this introductory phrase in the Seattle Times in intended to reinforce the original thesis? Follow along and see how well that works our.
But its latest effort to curb a public-health crisis that costs lives and money is threatened by a gun-rights coalition that includes the National Rifle Association.
Faster than a Speeding bullet, the emphasis shifts from "limit firearms-related violence" to MONEY!
Maybe the emphasis should be pointed toward the people who keep getting shot?
Yes, the entire reason for taxing ammunition is NOT to "limit firearms-related violence". but to impose a new (arbitrary) sales tax in a state which already has 10% of it's consumer goods prices going to the State instead of the Producer of said goods.
On Friday, a King County Superior Court judge will consider that group’s request for an injunction against the city’s gun-and-ammunition sales tax, which is set to take effect in January.
The judge ought to see that this revenue serves a crucial purpose and does not stop gun enthusiasts from legally obtaining firearms.No .. "The Judge" ought to see that this is a punitive tax which is specifically directed at the small percent of the populace who have chosen to take the Constitution at it word .. and will hereby be punished for their audacity:
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."Infringed". Curious word. Does that include "Shall Not Be Taxed"? (As in, for instance, a Poll Tax which has been ruled unconstitutional.)
The revenue collected on sales of guns and ammunition would fund research through the Harborview Injury Prevention and Research Center, in addition to prevention and education programs. A groundbreaking 2014 study funded by the city showed that patients admitted to hospitals statewide for gunshot wounds are 30 times more likely to return with another firearm injury compared to people hospitalized for other reasons.
Oh, you get a lot of repeat business in the hospitals? Doesn't that make you wonder why the same people keep getting shot? And by the way ...
How about this?
the same folks keep getting shot? Maybe hospitals should quit treating return gang-bangers on the grounds that they're just asking for it!
"..we will fix your owiee this time, but don't come back; change your life style, Dude, because you're obviously asking for it!"
All of the above has absolutely no bearing on the Constitutionality of the 2nd Amendment; however, it does fill wasted space when the originators of this dumb-shit regulation are asked "why would you do this, and who would it benefit"? Nobody has a lot of sympathy for the gang-bangers who are responsible for the "gun violence", so why not direct your punitive actions toward them?
Oh, and by the way .. Gang Bangers don't frequent the same markets as do law-abiding citizens; your precious tax won't do a damn thing to the price they pay for stolen firearms.
Actually, one would think that a tax on firearms and/or ammunition would at least be directed toward a benefit for law-abiding firearms owners and ammunition buyers. But NO! There is no benefit here .. it's just another sleazy Poll Tax!
Absurdly, the NRA has fought since 1996 to ban federal funding for gun-violence research — as if arming ourselves with factual information is a bad thing. The court should reject the arguments of parties asking for the injunction, including gun sellers, the NRA, the Bellevue-based Second Amendment Foundation and the National Shooting Sports Foundation.No, the court should direct their punitive actions toward the repeat felons who are driving the "shot while being a bad boy" statistics up ... not the honest citizens who don't engage in this kind of nefarious activity. The NRA doesn't represent gang-bangers; it represents law-abiding citizens.
You folks just don't seem to understand the difference between the two markets; one legal, the other based on activities which are already illegal.
I don't know about you, but I'm completely fed up with trying to balance gang activity with legal firearms ownership, and the state knows where the problem lies .. but won't "fix it".
Two percent of the population is responsible for 99 percent of the firearms violence, and what does the state do?
They penalize the law-abiding 98 percent of the population.
That's because the state knows that if they impose laws on the law-abiding, there's going to be some feedback .. but they can ignore that because legal gun-owners aren't going to shoot everybody in Tacoma. So it's safe for the legislators to be stupid.
No, this new legislative action won't reduce the amount of firearms violence, but if there's a law .. well, nobody expects the criminals to obey the law ... but it looks good on their resume. And besides, it won't really change anything, will it? So it's easy to pass a law; it's just not going to make a difference except to penalize law-abiding citizens. And you don't give a damn about them.
Why SHOULDN'T the NRA be opposed to gun violence research? You folks have the numbers, but you are ignoring them. The problem isn't with NRA members, but with career criminals, and you know it.
Any statistics you evolve will ignore the problem and focus on the people who have nothing to hide.
The PROBLEM isn't with the NRA folks, and it isn't even the fault of the gang-bangers.
The PROBLEM is that the state of Washington can't manage the law-ignoring people who generate all the gun-violence statistics, so they point the finger at the people who have guns .. but don't break the law.
Because they are the Big Target, and easy to hit.
And they don't shoot back.
You people make me sick.
No wonder I don't trust politicians ... .they don't trust ME!