Should We Publish Names And Addresses of Gun Owners?

[notyou2]

Don't ban the guns, restrict the ammunition. There, everyone is happy. Gun owners have their guns, and people that don't want to be shot feel better too.

Next sticky issue please.

[PLAYER57832]

Don't ban the guns, restrict the ammunition. There, everyone is happy. Gun owners have their guns, and people that don't want to be shot feel better too.

Next sticky issue please.

LOL.. actually, this has been mentioned.. limiting the purchase of certain high count magazines, plus the idea of background checks when buying ammunition.

[Baron Von PWN]

just slap a 60% tax on all ammunition and amunition products. eventually it will be too prohibitively expensive to go on a shooting rampage. Bam problem solved!

[AndyDufresne]

just slap a 60% tax on all ammunition and amunition products. eventually it will be too prohibitively expensive to go on a shooting rampage. Bam problem solved!

You should post this in the "Free Market in America would solve" topic.


--Andy

[thegreekdog]

just slap a 60% tax on all ammunition and amunition products. eventually it will be too prohibitively expensive to go on a shooting rampage. Bam problem solved!

It's worked with tobacco, alcohol, fatty foods, soda, and gasoline... why not guns?

[Night Strike]

just slap a 60% tax on all ammunition and amunition products. eventually it will be too prohibitively expensive to go on a shooting rampage. Bam problem solved!

You should post this in the "Free Market in America would solve" topic.


--Andy

How is adding an obscene amount of taxes to a specific product a Free Market Principle?

[Baron Von PWN]

just slap a 60% tax on all ammunition and amunition products. eventually it will be too prohibitively expensive to go on a shooting rampage. Bam problem solved!

You should post this in the "Free Market in America would solve" topic.


--Andy

How is adding an obscene amount of taxes to a specific product a Free Market Principle?

It's correcting a problem through market forces!

[Night Strike]

just slap a 60% tax on all ammunition and amunition products. eventually it will be too prohibitively expensive to go on a shooting rampage. Bam problem solved!

You should post this in the "Free Market in America would solve" topic.


--Andy

How is adding an obscene amount of taxes to a specific product a Free Market Principle?

It's correcting a problem through market forces!

Through the manipulation of market forces by the government.

True free market forces are supply, demand, innovation, efficiency, etc.

[spurgistan]

just slap a 60% tax on all ammunition and amunition products. eventually it will be too prohibitively expensive to go on a shooting rampage. Bam problem solved!

It's worked with tobacco, alcohol, fatty foods, soda, and gasoline... why not guns?

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nat ... 57737774/1

I dunno much about the efficacy of the other vice taxes you mentioned (and would argue against gasoline's inclusion based on poor substitutes for gasoline in the American economy), and I imagine that the soda tax is too recent for any real data to have emerged (which is to say my googling was inconclusive) but yeah. Vice taxes work sometimes.

[BigBallinStalin]

just slap a 60% tax on all ammunition and amunition products. eventually it will be too prohibitively expensive to go on a shooting rampage. Bam problem solved!

It's worked with tobacco, alcohol, fatty foods, soda, and gasoline... why not guns?

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nat ... 57737774/1

I dunno much about the efficacy of the other vice taxes you mentioned (and would argue against gasoline's inclusion based on poor substitutes for gasoline in the American economy), and I imagine that the soda tax is too recent for any real data to have emerged (which is to say my googling was inconclusive) but yeah. Vice taxes work sometimes.

Suppose we implement a 100% tax on all ammunition and ammunition products.
Henry, a disgruntled guy, takes his gun (whichever he already owns) or he takes a gun from a relative.
Instead of spending $10 on 50 bullets, he has to spend $20 because of the tax.
He finds a place where he can maximize his impact (gun-free zone, no security guards, etc.).
Then he kills a bunch of people.


He doesn't need that many bullets to kill people, so even a 100% tax won't curb this particular behavior. If someone really wants to kill a bunch of people, I don't see why they would be sensitive to price changes.
Since he's committing suicide after his task, then he won't be worried about how much of a chunk those bullets will remove from his budget. Furthermore, why not charge it to credit? A $200 spending limit should cover even the most onerous of taxes.


Most importantly, who does this really punish? Normal consumers of bullets, who are not crazy and/or dangerous people. It also punishes producers because the tax may reduce demand--depending on the elasticity of the curves.

So, how is this tax justifiable? It isn't.

[thegreekdog]

just slap a 60% tax on all ammunition and amunition products. eventually it will be too prohibitively expensive to go on a shooting rampage. Bam problem solved!

It's worked with tobacco, alcohol, fatty foods, soda, and gasoline... why not guns?

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nat ... 57737774/1

I dunno much about the efficacy of the other vice taxes you mentioned (and would argue against gasoline's inclusion based on poor substitutes for gasoline in the American economy), and I imagine that the soda tax is too recent for any real data to have emerged (which is to say my googling was inconclusive) but yeah. Vice taxes work sometimes.

No offense to US Today, but it rained here yesterday and less people smoked in my office. Must be the taxes.

In the interest of non-snarkiness though, correlation does not equal causation. And guns aren't cigarettes.

[Baron Von PWN]

just slap a 60% tax on all ammunition and amunition products. eventually it will be too prohibitively expensive to go on a shooting rampage. Bam problem solved!

It's worked with tobacco, alcohol, fatty foods, soda, and gasoline... why not guns?

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nat ... 57737774/1

I dunno much about the efficacy of the other vice taxes you mentioned (and would argue against gasoline's inclusion based on poor substitutes for gasoline in the American economy), and I imagine that the soda tax is too recent for any real data to have emerged (which is to say my googling was inconclusive) but yeah. Vice taxes work sometimes.

Suppose we implement a 100% tax on all ammunition and ammunition products.
Henry, a disgruntled guy, takes his gun (whichever he already owns) or he takes a gun from a relative.
Instead of spending $10 on 50 bullets, he has to spend $20 because of the tax.
He finds a place where he can maximize his impact (gun-free zone, no security guards, etc.).
Then he kills a bunch of people.


He doesn't need that many bullets to kill people, so even a 100% tax won't curb this particular behavior. If someone really wants to kill a bunch of people, I don't see why they would be sensitive to price changes.
Since he's committing suicide after his task, then he won't be worried about how much of a chunk those bullets will remove from his budget. Furthermore, why not charge it to credit? A $200 spending limit should cover even the most onerous of taxes.


Most importantly, who does this really punish? Normal consumers of bullets, who are not crazy and/or dangerous people. It also punishes producers because the tax may reduce demand--depending on the elasticity of the curves.

So, how is this tax justifiable? It isn't.

Well at least it would help the deficit!

[BigBallinStalin]

just slap a 60% tax on all ammunition and amunition products. eventually it will be too prohibitively expensive to go on a shooting rampage. Bam problem solved!

It's worked with tobacco, alcohol, fatty foods, soda, and gasoline... why not guns?

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nat ... 57737774/1

I dunno much about the efficacy of the other vice taxes you mentioned (and would argue against gasoline's inclusion based on poor substitutes for gasoline in the American economy), and I imagine that the soda tax is too recent for any real data to have emerged (which is to say my googling was inconclusive) but yeah. Vice taxes work sometimes.

Suppose we implement a 100% tax on all ammunition and ammunition products.
Henry, a disgruntled guy, takes his gun (whichever he already owns) or he takes a gun from a relative.
Instead of spending $10 on 50 bullets, he has to spend $20 because of the tax.
He finds a place where he can maximize his impact (gun-free zone, no security guards, etc.).
Then he kills a bunch of people.


He doesn't need that many bullets to kill people, so even a 100% tax won't curb this particular behavior. If someone really wants to kill a bunch of people, I don't see why they would be sensitive to price changes.
Since he's committing suicide after his task, then he won't be worried about how much of a chunk those bullets will remove from his budget. Furthermore, why not charge it to credit? A $200 spending limit should cover even the most onerous of taxes.


Most importantly, who does this really punish? Normal consumers of bullets, who are not crazy and/or dangerous people. It also punishes producers because the tax may reduce demand--depending on the elasticity of the curves.

So, how is this tax justifiable? It isn't.

Well at least it would help the deficit!

Yeah! Because we all know that politicians are so responsible when it comes to spending other people's money. Just give them more! Sure! They won't at all continue the deficit spending with extra revenue--no no no! Not them. Because politicians are altruistic. The bureaucrats tirelessly work at promoting the general interest, which is self-evident and easily known.

(The above paragraph sounds naive, but many people implicitly assume this about politicians. It's really weird).

[AndyDufresne]

just slap a 60% tax on all ammunition and amunition products. eventually it will be too prohibitively expensive to go on a shooting rampage. Bam problem solved!

You should post this in the "Free Market in America would solve" topic.


--Andy

How is adding an obscene amount of taxes to a specific product a Free Market Principle?

-1 point for taking Free Market in America topic seriously.


--Andy

[Night Strike]

just slap a 60% tax on all ammunition and amunition products. eventually it will be too prohibitively expensive to go on a shooting rampage. Bam problem solved!

You should post this in the "Free Market in America would solve" topic.


--Andy

How is adding an obscene amount of taxes to a specific product a Free Market Principle?

-1 point for taking Free Market in America topic seriously.


--Andy

+1 for completely avoiding that thread and not knowing whether it's a serious thread or a parody thread at this point in time.