In response to:

Plan B: Taxing to Death the Firearms Industry

RickG_Prov_RI Wrote: Mar 11, 2013 1:59 PM
Check out the Pittman-Robertson Act and see what purchasing does for the Fish and Wildlife programs. The less we buy the less there will be. I'm certain they're not going to earmark the money from taxes to replace what the fund will lose from the earmarked taxes are already being put in.
Luscious Lars Wrote: Mar 11, 2013 2:13 PM
The hard left progressives would like to see hunting and fishing banned as well.They'll lose no sleep over some lost revenues which support hunting and fishing.
RickG_Prov_RI Wrote: Mar 11, 2013 2:20 PM
The tree huggers won't be happy when the money that goes into open spaces isn't there and they need a gun if they go hiking because there won't be any cash for Park Rangers either.
Luscious Lars Wrote: Mar 11, 2013 3:01 PM
If you go hiking in the back country of Yellowstone and other western parks, you best be carrying something of substance which will halt the attack of a grizzly or a cougar. Otherwise, you may end up as lunch or dinner.
RickG_Prov_RI Wrote: Mar 11, 2013 5:35 PM
I was referring more to the same ornery critters that plague cities too. Criminals and poachers just love wide open gun free zones as much as they love confined ones.

If you can't ban it, tax it into being unattainable. As efforts to reinstate a federal ban on modern sporting rifles at the federal level fail to gain traction, lawmakers on Capitol Hill are looking for another option to get their gun control goals fulfilled with a little help from the IRS.

The proposals range from the modest -- a proposed 5 percent tax in New Jersey -- to the steep -- a proposed 50 percent ammo tax in Maryland. The bills follow efforts to ban...

Related Tags: IRS