View Single Post
Old July 5, 2012, 01:16 PM   #17
sholling
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 18, 1999
Location: Hemet (middle of nowhere) California
Posts: 4,261
What this ruling did was say that there are absolutely no limits on what can be taxed or how convoluted those taxes are or what activity can be controlled through taxation. Of course historically SCOTUS has been fine with taxing arms out of the reach of common citizens. That was the "logic" behind the NFA and while $250 doesn't sound like an arm and a leg now at the it was the equivalent to roughly $3200 in today's dollars per weapon transferred. They could easily extend the NFA to cover all non-muzzle loading black powder weapons and adjust the transfer tax "for inflation" to $3200 each and even require you to pay a similar per weapon tax to register and grandfather in each of your existing firearms. Or create a national property tax of say $1000/year/firearm, or a $10/rd healthcare tax on ammo and reloading supplies to cover "health risks". They aren't restricting your right to keep and bear arms - just taxing it out of reach of most of us. The last of the limits on federal power were erased from the constitution as long as the method used to control us is labeled a tax.
__________________
Proud Life Member: National Rifle Association, California Rifle & Pistol Association, and the Second Amendment Foundation.
Annual Member: Revolutionary War Veterans Association (Project Appleseed) and the Madison Society.

Last edited by sholling; July 5, 2012 at 02:23 PM.
sholling is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.02166 seconds with 8 queries