This video was Tweeted out by Connecticut State Representative Jillian Gilchrest.
https://twitter.com/Jilchrest/status/1092519429232095243
She is so excited to propose a bill that would increase the sales tax on ammo to 50%.
Her example is “if someone were to buy a fifty cartridge box of ammunition” they would pay $15 instead of $10.
Again, we are treated to another anti-gun Democrat who just sounds fucking stupid when talking about something gun related. They string words together, that while technically correct, come up with a sentence that sounds like it was spoken by someone form whom English is not their primary language and just learned recently.
This really does illustrate just how different the cultural gulf is between the Left and Right on topics like this, that when they talk about guns they sound like they are learning to speak a foreign language.
But I digress…
She admits that the purpose of this tax is to decrease use by increasing cost. Exactly like what Connecticut has done with cigarettes.
The question raised by this bill is, who is most going to be hurt by this punitive taxation on ammo?
How much ammo do criminals go through?
I’d guess, not much. You can rob a lot of stores without firing a shot.
When it comes to mass shootings, what we’ve seen in virtually all of them is the shooter taking weeks and months to plan the shooting. Most of them seem to know that they will not survive the event, given the number that end in suicides. Will a $100 in taxes on a case of 9mm really be the hindrance to the wannabe mass shooter who plans on going down in blaze of infamy?
Of course not.
This bill is aimed at target shooters who buy large volumes of ammo for practice or competition.
A USPSA stage has a max of 32 round required, six stages per course, that’s 192 rounds. Not all stages meet the max, but factor in misses and re-shoots, and 200 rounds per match is a decent number.
That’s $20 in taxes using cheap 9mm.
A round of Trap or Sporting Clays is 100 rounds. That’s about $15 in taxes for 12 gauge target loads.
The text of the bill isn’t available yet, so I don’t know if it will put this tax on reloading components or not. Part of me thinks it will because she clearly hates target shooters. Part of me thinks it won’t because she’s too stupid to consider that.
Either way, reloading is not an option for some people, and law abiding gun owners should not be forced into rolling their own in secret to avoid oppressive goverment like the Israelis under the British Mandate.
Her Tweet says “I’m hearing push back about the need to protect one’s home… but how much ammunition does someone really need to do that?”
That’s strawman held together with bullshit.
It’s not about the one box of Golden Saber I have loaded in my home defense gun.
It’s about the cases of UMC I burn up at the range in practice.
My ammo budget, as a rank amateur who don’t get to shoot as much as I’d like, is at a minimum 250 rounds of 45 ACP per month. If I do a round of clays or have a day zeroing rifles, or shoot the odd carbine match, I can bump that to 500 rounds per month.
With an MSRP of $112 per mega-pack of 45, that’s $56 in taxes per month alone on just pistol ammo.
It is glaringly obvious that this bill is supposed to suppress target and competitive shooting in the Constitution State by wearing down the ammo budgets of working and middle class shooters.
Because nothing says “Constitution” like making exercising a right explicitly protected in the bill of rights, prohibitively expensive.
Also….
It’s great how a Democrat can mention that for things like cigarettes and ammo that increasing taxes has the direct goal of reducing consumption by making the good more expensive.
Then on the other hand they will say that increasing taxes on income or payroll or capital gains will not decrease any productivity by making production more expensive.
Why are they allowed to slide on holding these contradictory opinions simultaneously.
This guy will tell you it might take a full mag to defend yourself!
https://www.ammoland.com/2019/02/houston-gunfight-as-deadly-as-ok-corral-home-owner-uses-ak47-in-self-defense/?utm_source=Ammoland+Subscribers&utm_campaign=83f6f1c1ba-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6f6fac3eaa-83f6f1c1ba-20761325#axzz5efQLeyPE
[…] Pick off the most enthusiastic, and you’ll be rid of your deplorable gun culture in a generati…. That’s what gun control is intended to do. It has nothing at all to do with reducing crime or fighting “gun violence.” Does this lawmaker seriously want us to believe she has evidence that criminals are going through large volumes of ammunition, and that a tax on ammo will help? J. KB is absolutely right: this is intended to discourage target shooting. Someone should ask her who drafted her bill, because lawmakers almost never draft their own bills. Bills are almost universally drafted by staff with the help of lobbyists. Who’s paying the lobbyists that helped her staff? I can give you one guess. […]
[…] Pick off the most enthusiastic, and you’ll be rid of your deplorable gun culture in a generati…. That’s what gun control is intended to do. It has nothing at all to do with reducing crime or fighting “gun violence.” Does this lawmaker seriously want us to believe she has evidence that criminals are going through large volumes of ammunition, and that a tax on ammo will help? J. KB is absolutely right: this is intended to discourage target shooting. Someone should ask her who drafted her bill, because lawmakers almost never draft their own bills. Bills are almost universally drafted by staff with the help of lobbyists. Who’s paying the lobbyists that helped her staff? I can give you one guess. […]
SMH.
Example #5,281,795 of why progtards are a disease.
What you guys need to do is to remember this and be sure to boot her out next election cycle. Complaining on here won’t accomplish anything until you elect someone else.
“How much ammo do criminals go through? I’d guess, not much. You can rob a lot of stores without firing a shot.”
Additionally, if you’re planning mass murder (and expect to be either killed or incarcerated), how would the extra cost dissuade you? It wouldn’t.
All this would do is decrease folks’ practice, which would be a convenient excuse for them to say folks aren’t trained well enough.
I’m hearing push back about the need to protect one’s home… but how much ammunition does someone really need to do that?
I don’t know. Why don’t you ask your private security guards (i.e. not “law enforcement”) how many rounds they use up in practice and training, so they don’t shoot your sorry @$$ in your own home?
How do I go about introducing a bill that would tax legislators’ pens, computers, printers (including paper and toner), etc., at 200% the purchase price, and exempting private citizens? Plus a $1,000 fee on each revenue-raising bill introduced, plus an extra dime for each word contained therein, and $100 for each such bill sponsored, due at the bill’s first reading and paid entirely out of pocket (read: not out of campaign funds nor out of the Congressional budget)?
After all, unlike keeping and bearing arms, holding a Congressional seat isn’t a Constitutionally-protected right.
I expect to hear push-back about needing to cast votes in Congress, but how many pens does someone really need to do that?
On one hand, the gun grabbers talk about how mandatory training is necessary, and that only the well trained should be able to own guns, etc…
Then they introduce a law that will prevent people from training.
[…] Gun control is aimed at shooters. And Sebastian is right here: […]
[…] 5, 2019Comment to Connecticut State Representative admits gun control bill is to hurt target shooters[See also […]
Recreational target shooters, defensive practice shooters, competition shooters, and shooting instructors (both formal and informal).
She’s got a bad case of ‘Crazy Face”, it looks like her face is broken!
Competition target shooters can go through 20,000 rounds or more a MONTH. That will kill the sport or force the shooters to move to another State.
I wish I could claim responsibility for the phrase but I can think of no more accurate epithet than “Glittering Jewel of Colossal Ignorance”.
Thanks for covering a CT issue, much appreciated.
We’ve got a ton of gun bills introduced this session. I’m sure Lamont would sign all the anti ones.
I’m dubious the bill would pass but there is one the is very likely to pass about being required to produce your permit if you are open carrying. There is also a stupid ghost guns and safe storage bill introduced that are likely to pass because ghost guns ew and some teenager “accidentally” killed himself with a gun at a friend’s house.
Here is a link regarding the ammo bill. I do not believe it covers components but I don’t care enough to search out the statute numbers are read them at this time.
https://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/cgabillstatus/cgabillstatus.asp?selBillType=Bill&bill_num=HB05700&which_year=2019
Regardless, I think we in CT should just start taking the advice of our esteemed senators and ignore laws we disagree with, in their case they were taking about federal immigration laws, but their logic. Is equally applicable to all areas.
Meanwhile guns are a virtual non issue bit the legislature will continue to spend us into an ever deepening hole without actually addressing and doing the hard work of unfucking the state. Same old retardation different day.
[…] thought regressive taxes that made it harder for low income people to exercise civil rights were a bad […]