• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Too high taxes on ammo -- 2nd Amendment violation?

Are too high taxes on ammunition a 2nd Amendment violation?

  • Total voters
    20
Luna Tick

Luna Tick

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 31, 2010
Messages
2,148
Reaction score
867
Location
Nebraska
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The political climate isn't there for banning guns. Americans of most political persuasions support responsible gun ownership. However, it might be possible for a backdoor ban. If they taxed the crap out ammunition, making it extremely expensive, that would effectively make gun ownership a rich person's privilege. I personally think that would violate the 2nd Amendment. What do you think?
 
It was talked about years ago, we raised holy hell and they dropped the idea for the time being.


Old news.
 
Luna Tick said:
The political climate isn't there for banning guns. Americans of most political persuasions support responsible gun ownership. However, it might be possible for a backdoor ban. If they taxed the crap out ammunition, making it extremely expensive, that would effectively make gun ownership a rich person's privilege. I personally think that would violate the 2nd Amendment. What do you think?
Click to expand...


it would be good grounds to terminate the job of whomever implemented such a tax
 
I'm not a constitutional scholar, but I'd say "yes". Imposing exhorbitant special taxes on ammunition is clearly a backdoor attempt at gun control. "Have all the guns you want, but you can't afford to shoot them, bwahahahaha" kind of thing.
 
Taxing an item at extreme rates is functionally no different from banning it and should be treated as such.
 
Luna Tick said:
The political climate isn't there for banning guns. Americans of most political persuasions support responsible gun ownership. However, it might be possible for a backdoor ban. If they taxed the crap out ammunition, making it extremely expensive, that would effectively make gun ownership a rich person's privilege. I personally think that would violate the 2nd Amendment. What do you think?
Click to expand...

See also the efforts to ban or restrict “junk guns” and “Saturday-night specials”. Same idea.
 
Luna Tick said:
The political climate isn't there for banning guns. Americans of most political persuasions support responsible gun ownership. However, it might be possible for a backdoor ban. If they taxed the crap out ammunition, making it extremely expensive, that would effectively make gun ownership a rich person's privilege. I personally think that would violate the 2nd Amendment. What do you think?
Click to expand...

Yes, making it too arduous to exercise one's constitutional rights is essentially a restriction on those rights.
 
Kandahar said:
Yes, making it too arduous to exercise one's constitutional rights is essentially a restriction on those rights.
Click to expand...

which is why the FDR administration levied a 200 dollar tax on machine guns in 1934. goes what 200 dollars meant back then
 
Goshin said:
It was talked about years ago, we raised holy hell and they dropped the idea for the time being.


Old news.
Click to expand...
You're a southerner?

Then I'm guessing you know this issue like the back of your red hand.
 
Luna Tick said:
The political climate isn't there for banning guns. Americans of most political persuasions support responsible gun ownership. However, it might be possible for a backdoor ban. If they taxed the crap out ammunition, making it extremely expensive, that would effectively make gun ownership a rich person's privilege. I personally think that would violate the 2nd Amendment. What do you think?
Click to expand...

Sort of like what they are doing with cigarettes.

 
Last edited:
HonestJoe said:
Quite possibly. Maybe the 2nd Amendment is wrong though?
Click to expand...

If that is the case then the People should move to repeal the 2nd Amendment. I am not a fan of trying to "get around" the Constitution.
 
OnWisconsin said:
Make you're own bullets.. ?
Click to expand...

Some of us already do. In fact MANY of us do. Both for competition shooting and for self-defense.

As to the idea of taxing the ammunition.... It's been discussed before, as have outright bans on different types of ammunition. In some places like Massachusetts there are partial or de facto bans. You can't buy ammo here unless you're a MA resident with a LTC or FID card. It's almost impossible to get ammunition shipped into this state if you're a private citizen and it's even difficult to get ammunition components from certain retailers at this point. Of course that just means we have to work smarter, not harder.
 
Sarcogito said:
If that is the case then the People should move to repeal the 2nd Amendment. I am not a fan of trying to "get around" the Constitution.
Click to expand...
That wasn't really my point. I was suggesting that "Is this Constitutional?" isn't the only relevant question; "Is this right?" is also key. The problem is that if the first answer is "no" but the second answer is "yes", you have a conclusion that many Americans seem unwilling to address.

I'd suggest that the right to bear arms is restricted in all sorts of perfectly practical ways in the US, all of which could be easily argued as being unconstitutional. Do the principal you're arguing on even really exist any more? Would you maybe have a stronger argument if you made practical arguments against taxation on ammunition? I'm just saying that the scope of this kind of debate could be a little wider.
 
Luna Tick said:
The political climate isn't there for banning guns. Americans of most political persuasions support responsible gun ownership. However, it might be possible for a backdoor ban. If they taxed the crap out ammunition, making it extremely expensive, that would effectively make gun ownership a rich person's privilege. I personally think that would violate the 2nd Amendment. What do you think?
Click to expand...

I think you might get more honest answers if you asked if it would be a violation 1st amendment violation to tax the hell out of religious books, paper,printers, newspapers and so on.
 
jamesrage said:
I think you might get more honest answers if you asked if it would be a violation 1st amendment violation to tax the hell out of religious books, paper,printers, newspapers and so on.
Click to expand...

I think the general principle applies regardless of which constitutional right is at stake. IMO it's fine to have some regulations if they serve a legitimate purpose (e.g. background checks for guns, public safety limitations for free speech)...the problem is when the regulations serve no legitimate purpose and only make it more difficult for people to exercise their rights. This is why I would oppose things like a punitive tax on ammo, it's why I oppose voter ID laws, and it's why I oppose draconian rules on abortion clinics (e.g. they have to be affiliated with a local hospital). These things are all just an indirect way of making it difficult for people to exercise their rights without serving any legitimate purpose, and should be considered unconstitutional for the same reasons that an outright ban would be.
 
Last edited:
Biggest difference between FDR's tax on automatic weapons and a tax on bullets is there was soooo little demand for the tommy gun among the blue collar folks the high retail price was already putting it out of reach, that and the nasty depression thing making just keeping the family fed a higher priority than a streetsweeper he would never use. Good try though...

Bullets are another issue, lets try and focus.... :2razz:

it does make a good topic to bring out the chest puffing and ranting, good for stirring the pot and getting the usual suspects out to chant... "We'll flay 'em alive iff'n they try that on MY watch!"

I see any loose talk of taxes on bullets as am attempt to push panic buying at a bigger profit.
 
HonestJoe said:
Quite possibly. Maybe the 2nd Amendment is wrong though?
Click to expand...

I refer you to what James had said.

jamesrage said:
I think you might get more honest answers if you asked if it would be a violation 1st amendment violation to tax the hell out of religious books, paper,printers, newspapers and so on.
Click to expand...
 
Luna Tick said:
The political climate isn't there for banning guns. Americans of most political persuasions support responsible gun ownership. However, it might be possible for a backdoor ban. If they taxed the crap out ammunition, making it extremely expensive, that would effectively make gun ownership a rich person's privilege. I personally think that would violate the 2nd Amendment. What do you think?
Click to expand...

That is how machine guns and other weapons were banned. They did not actually outlaw ownership. Rather, they imposed a MASSIVE tax of $250 each - a sum equating thousands of dollars in today's dollar.

The Zimmerman case is another example of attempting to backdoor outlawing guns. If they can't outlaw guns they'll declare it murder to ever use one in self defense. If they can't get the political backing to outlaw guns, they'll outlaw using one.
 
HonestJoe said:
That wasn't really my point. I was suggesting that "Is this Constitutional?" isn't the only relevant question; "Is this right?" is also key. The problem is that if the first answer is "no" but the second answer is "yes", you have a conclusion that many Americans seem unwilling to address.
Click to expand...

If something is both "wrong" and Constitutional then there are methods to amend the constitution.

I'd suggest that the right to bear arms is restricted in all sorts of perfectly practical ways in the US, all of which could be easily argued as being unconstitutional.
Click to expand...

And those of us who do believe those structures which restrict the 2nd Amendment and are unconstitutional should and must be stricken.
Do the principal you're arguing on even really exist any more?
Click to expand...

It exists. Is your position that no one actually has any rights whatsoever?


Would you maybe have a stronger argument if you made practical arguments against taxation on ammunition?
Click to expand...

No, that would be accepting a special tax on ammunition is a legitimate power of government.

I'm just saying that the scope of this kind of debate could be a little wider.
Click to expand...

The purpose of the Constitution is to establish powers of the government and limit them to those established powers as well as a means to enumerate rights of citizens that are not to be enfringed upon by the government.

The right to bear arms is a co-equal right to the others (those that are Enumerated) and indeed is the one that will protect the others.

The OP is about constitutionality of a tax on ammo. That is the purpose of this thread.
 
I think the court just ruled on ObamaCare the government can do anything if it is "taxes."
 
Smart said:
You're a southerner?

Then I'm guessing you know this issue like the back of your red hand.
Click to expand...
'



The back of my RED hand huh? Bud, what the heck does that mean?
 
Why not do this to the second amendment? We've done to the first and fourth already!

On the surface, I don't think the constitution directly prohibits this sort of thing, even if it is specifically designed as a backdoor ban. However, the lack of any legitimate government purpose that would be furthered by such a backdoor ban would make it unconstitutional. Were such a purpose to emerge, it would fit within existing constitutional rulings. A tax like this wouldn't make us much safer, and certainly wouldn't make enough of a difference to warrant losing this right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom