Seattle Considers Sin Tax on Guns and Ammo
Welcome to the wacky world of Municipal Anti-Gun Ordinances. San Francisco and Los Angeles have city-specific magazine bans and gun storage requirements, and now it appears that Seattle may target gun owners with new “sin taxes” on firearms and ammunition.
$25 Per Gun and Five Cents Per Round
The Seattle City Council will soon vote on a new local law that will add a $25.00 surcharge to every new gun purchase. In addition, the proposed Seattle City Ordinance will add a $0.05 (five cent) fee to each and every centerfire round sold in Seattle. Rimfire .22LR rounds will be taxed $0.02 per round.
The stated purpose for the new Gun and Ammo Tax is to raise money to combat crime, according to Seattle City Council President Tim Burgess, author of the Gun Tax ordinance. Burgess told local KING-5 TV reporters that this is essentially a “Sin Tax” on guns and ammo: “We’ve been working on this for several years. Sure, I wish we would have done this 20 years ago, but we know what the problem is. We tax cigarettes and alcohol and even wood-burning stoves for public health purposes. Why not guns and ammunition?”
While supporters of the Gun and Ammo Tax, including Seattle Mayor Ed Murray, claim the new city tax would raise over $300,000 to fight crime, in reality this measure is more about getting rid of guns that it is about making Seattle safe. The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) has opposed the Seattle Gun and Ammo Tax, stating: “[This ordinance] will have no effect on decreasing gun violence. It is designed to place a huge burden on legitimate firearms retailers and law-abiding gun owners. Additionally, the proposed ordinance is a gross violation of Washington’s firearms preemption statute.”
Daniel Xu, writing in OutdoorHub.com notes that gun buyers already pay Excise Taxes with each purchase: “However, unlike the [Federal] Pittman-Robertson Excise Tax, which retains funds for conservation and habitat-protection efforts, the funds collected by the ordinance will go entirely back into the city for ‘gun violence research and prevention programs’. City leaders have yet to specify… how the funds will be spent.”
READ Related Story in OutdoorHub.com. Public domain Seattle photo by Rattlhed.
Similar Posts:
- Seattle Gun and Ammo Tax Challenged by Firearms Groups
- Second Amendment Foundation and NRA Sue City of Seattle
- Contrary to Media Reports, Gun Crime is Decreasing
- Guns & Ammo Taxes Have Supported Conservation for 75 Years
- New Legislation Could Help States Use Fed Money for Gun Ranges
Tags: Ammo Tax, Cigarette Tax, Daniel Xu, Los Angeles, NSSF, San Francisco, Seattle, Sin Tax, Washington
Sorry, the Feds do NOT keep all the P-R Act funds; much is returned to the states for conservation uses. Course Washington has a long history of thinking such projects as bike trails are an acceptable use of these funds paid by sportsmen…
Editor: I don’t think Daniel Xu meant that Pittman-Robertson funds were only used in Federal programs, but rather that these taxes were collected by the Feds and all ear-marked for conservation and habitat support, whether in Federal or regional programs.
Wonder when the Lib’s are going to try to pass a tax on freedom of speech, religion or the press? What about a poll tax too? Shouldn’t people have to pay a tax on the voter card that you use at the polls! Lots of sarcasm!!
People will just buy their guns and ammo in the next town and the sales tax revenue will go elsewhere
Liberals are generally anti 2 amendment, basically 99 44/100%. How come all the major cities that have been dominated by liberal Democrats have the most restrictive gun laws? And why do these same cities have the highest gun related violence? I think these taxes are just what liberals do and gun owners are an easy mark.
ALL anti gun legislation that impedes the civil liberties of law abiding citizens is brought forth by liberals without question. Not a debate just fact. The same group of democrat liberals that fail to call for enforcement of laws already on the books. A common sense approach as most all gun violence is inner city, illegal pistol related. The Seattle City Council is all demacrates….what a surprise.
David Lawson says:
August 8, 2015 at 3:20 pm
…
“I enjoy shooting responsibly and wish stronger gun laws were in place to keep weapons from the hands of undesirables. I would not consider stronger gun laws an attack on the second amendment … simply reinforcing public safety.”
Leaving aside the liberal/conservative issue, I ask:
If a man is willing to break the laws against murder or assault, what makes you think that another law prohibiting his gun will stop him?
If by “undesirable” you mean “felon”, then no additional law is needed. If a felon obtains a gun, he has committed another felony. The penalties are plenty stiff enough already, assuming that he is charged and prosecuted and convicted.
If by “undesirable” you mean “somebody I don’t like,” then that is a personal issue. I might not like my neighbor, but I have no legal means to stop him from behaving lawfully.
Jerry Shaw you are wasting your time answering our Lib Troll David Lawson….He’s pushing for NEW LAWS for GUN SAFETY……on an open gun related Forum….tells you how smart he is!
Maybe the mayor of Seattle should have used the money he spent on painting city cross walks the rainbow color for gun violence research.
The problem with the liberals in Seattle is when their minds are made up nothing can change it. the sad thing is what ever happens in Seattle ends up spreading through out the state.
David Lawson,
I can’t find a single thread on this forum with your name on it, do you go by a different handle? Are you a contributor here?
Do you even live in the US?
President at Shooters Choice?
http://www.intelius.com/people/David-Lawson/08zq5bbp5v7
David Lawson says:
August 8, 2015 at 3:20 pm
What makes so many on this site think ‘Libs’ are anti gun??
That’s damn funny, right there.
The facts, I believe, would be my answer.
Don’t feed the trolls
Huh, my full name is right there, you typed it into your erratic and emotional response, anyone here knows who I am and how to reach me, who’s the one trying to conceal his identity? I’ve never sent you an email so have no idea what your talking about.
Well “David” assuming that’s your real name, I can find no positive contributions you have made to this community, which tells me your not part of it, you seek conflict and when you get cornered you lash out and call anyone who calls you on your charade a low life, like I said people here know me, you on the other hand choose hide behind a false identity, your an anti gun activist, wether you own a gun or not is irrelevant, many anti gunners want to keep their guns but deprive the rest of the citizens their right, those are the most depraved of all
David Lawson said to Gary Eliseo, “…. a moron like you.”
Socrates said, “When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.”
Badly played, Mr. Lawson. Game, set, match to Mr Eliseo.
Ok moderators, we’re counting on you to “escort” Mr. Lawson off the range now.
He’s a worthless troll trying to people upset.
Lawson,
The information on Intellus is no different than what you’d find in the phone book. So now you’ve resorted to threatening me? You do know that is illegal right? Yes I feel perfectly safe, you know where to find me….
Gary,
Trying to engage these contra-RKBA trolls in a reasoned discussion is like wrestling with a pig. You get muddy, slimy, tired and then you realize…they like it. I find it’s more useful to practice baiting them with clever invective and see how long before they go to upper case rants… “Lawson, that’s noswal backwards or Vidwa Dilnaso inside out.”. “Hey, Noswal, your last post was somewhat incomprehensible. Why don’t you try it again after you come down off of you psycho-tropic meds.”