The latest from Sen. Harry Reid, taxes on your guns

LoboGunLeather

US Veteran
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
7,940
Reaction score
34,556
Location
Colorado
Just passed through senate committee, Senator Reid's proposal would require all transfers between individuals (including inheritances, gifts, etc) to go through a FFL (dealer, manufacturer, etc) with mandatory NICS background check, for which the fees to be charged will be determined by the Attorney General (our old friend Eric Holder presently holds that office).

Essentially, this would amount to a tax (with no cap or limitations) on every firearms transaction, paid by the individual for a service performed solely for the government.

Additionally, the result would be an ever-growing database amounting to the registration of all firearms and firearms owners, necessary for the purpose of administering the new taxing authority.

As with a number of other initiatives pursued under the current administration, this measure was pushed through without publicity and without public debate, simpy rolled into a "comprehensive gun control" bill (S. 649).

I suggest S. 649 should be watched very closely.
 
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
This most recent push for sweeping gun control makes the last AWB look like a garden party. They will not stop at trying to sneak things into any legislation that passes and virtually any bill could be a Trojan horse filled with trouble. Per LoboGunLeather, this current bill, S 649 needs to be watched carefully as well as all other bills passed by the current members of congress. It wouldn't surprise me to discover that the recent measure regarding Saturday mail delivery didn't have an anti gun rider that hasn't yet come to light.
 
No,.. it's about CONTROL. Never give in to these little petty dicators. Force them to follow the constitution. Period. No compromise,..... no common sence laws. We have plenty of laws now. Drive 'em out like a herd of Heifers.
 
I see what he did there... He snuck Chucky Schumer's bill in there when no one was looking.

My inner cynic tells me that we're going to see someone attempting to do this with Feinstein's bill in the near future.
 
Just emailed both of my senators, the good news our local congressman Rep Bob Goodlatte who chairs the House Judicary Committe says it's dead in the house.
 
Hope this isn't too political...

Funny how it took a Constitutional Amendment to authorize an income tax, and it took another to authorize the Congress to ban alcohol, but the current Congress thinks it can tax whatever it wants whenever it wants for whatever it wants on its own authority. They want to tax gun sales? Fine. Amend the Constitution. The 10th Amendment says otherwise...
 
Here's a good question: Under current law, who regulates the price of a criminal background checks and firearm transfer fees?

Here's another: Does the Attorney General of the Unites States merely enforce the laws of the land or is there an existing precedent where he's exercized regulatory powers in the past?

The reason I'm asking this is because I'm wondering if the UBC bill is possibly granting a power solely reserved for the Legislative branch to what is technically the Executive branch.

That, and I don't want to sound like an idiot when I voice my civil but vehement disapproval to my elected officials. :D
 
Oh, well. Letters sent to my Congress critters. I read the law again and it seems it grants even more unchecked regulatory powers to the AG than I had initially thought. Scary stuff like denying up to 3% of state funding for failing to comply with record-keeping and reporting requirements. I don't seem to recall the chief LEO of the United States ever having such powers.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top