Latest Breaking News

CTyankee

(68,216 posts)

72. well, you can look it up since that was the question before the court. What did they rule?

Tue Aug 11, 2015, 07:18 PM

Aug 2015

Here's a strong hint: http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/05/politics/scotus-health-care-tax/

sorry if you are disappointed.

Jaysus, am I still on DU?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

113 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Challenge likely as Seattle opts to add tax on gun, ammunition sales [View all] Newsjock Aug 2015 OP

Should be $250, just to cover the medical costs of gun carnage. Guns are not immune from taxes. Fred Sanders Aug 2015 #1

Sure they are GP6971 Aug 2015 #3

What Does Gun Violence in America Really Cost? stone space Aug 2015 #35

Maybe my proposed $250 per gun Death Tax on guns is too low. Maybe better to just melt them all. Fred Sanders Aug 2015 #43

"They shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their AK-47s into guitars." stone space Aug 2015 #46

It's about time someone remembered that "well regulated" is in the Second Amendment. LonePirate Aug 2015 #2

It's about time that someone learns what the founding fathers meant by "well regulated" in the 2A. GGJohn Aug 2015 #5

Ah, the Second Amendment "meant something different way back then" villager Aug 2015 #9

More likely Cryptoad Aug 2015 #10

2 totally different issues. GGJohn Aug 2015 #15

Like in the militia/military, not any ole yahoo who wants to walk down the street with a gun. Hoyt Aug 2015 #30

I don't think the founding fathers envisioned the internet, not automobiles, GGJohn Aug 2015 #78

Yup, I could see that one coming! We're such idiots, we can't read the Constitution... CTyankee Aug 2015 #18

It is easy to read. Understanding is another thing all together. nt hack89 Aug 2015 #20

well, there is such a thing as disagreement in "understanding." CTyankee Aug 2015 #21

But the argument that language has changed in 250 years is a logical and reasonable one hack89 Aug 2015 #22

fine, you have your understanding and I have mine. CTyankee Aug 2015 #23

Once gun control thought moves beyond bumper stickers and tweets hack89 Aug 2015 #28

We will make progress. Darb Aug 2015 #97

I threaten no one hack89 Aug 2015 #99

The Constitution was amended to specifically address and change on the issue of slavery. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Aug 2015 #27

well, we had to fight a Civil War in order to do that successfully. CTyankee Aug 2015 #68

The meaning of the entire Second Amendment has changed since it was written. LonePirate Aug 2015 #25

Did you know at NRA headquarters they ERASED the "well regulated" part in their commemerative wall plaque? Fred Sanders Aug 2015 #24

+1. And, except for the executive shooting range, they don't allow any ole armed yahoo to walk into Hoyt Aug 2015 #32

Frankly I would not mind them adding in a mandatory safety evaluation course for cstanleytech Aug 2015 #4

I'm fine with any tax, registration, etc., requirements imposed on ammo. We ought to be taxing, Hoyt Aug 2015 #6

+1000s DinahMoeHum Aug 2015 #102

Not to be a downer sarisataka Aug 2015 #7

I think it was Chris Rock who said that "bullets should cost $10,000 a piece". Hulk Aug 2015 #8

There is a good reason Chris Rock is an entertainer and not a constitutional scholar hack89 Aug 2015 #12

They have many sin taxes, this is just another sin. Darb Aug 2015 #13

You cannot tax a civil right out of existence hack89 Aug 2015 #14

Didn't you get the memo? melm00se Aug 2015 #17

The 2nd doesn't say what you think it says. Darb Aug 2015 #93

you might want to read the Heller decision melm00se Aug 2015 #104

Go read the Democratic party platform hack89 Aug 2015 #106

Bullets are a Civil Right? stone space Aug 2015 #36

What kind of rights are in the Bill of Rights? hack89 Aug 2015 #38

I'm asking you to rank the right to bullets with the right to water, food, and shelter. stone space Aug 2015 #39

All constitutional rights are of equal value in the eyes of the law hack89 Aug 2015 #40

Do you rank the right to bullets above or below the right to water? stone space Aug 2015 #41

They are equal in the eyes of the law hack89 Aug 2015 #42

In YOUR eyes, is the right to bullets ranked... stone space Aug 2015 #44

In my eyes they are all equal hack89 Aug 2015 #47

I disagree strongly. I put the right to water above... stone space Aug 2015 #48

That's fine. hack89 Aug 2015 #50

Just remember. Bullets are a privilage, not a right. (nt) stone space Aug 2015 #80

If you actually believe that, then you are ignorant of poll taxes and their unconstitutionality. eom GGJohn Aug 2015 #82

Wrong. The 2A covers ammunition. hack89 Aug 2015 #83

Food, water, shelter, voting...those are rights. Not bullets. (nt) stone space Aug 2015 #87

So the Bill of Rights are not really rights? Ok. Nt hack89 Aug 2015 #88

Civics isn't your strong suit is it. eom. GGJohn Aug 2015 #89

Yes, you can tax guns and bullets. Darb Aug 2015 #94

Never said you couldn't - there is a federal tax on guns and ammo right now hack89 Aug 2015 #100

Sin tax on things not in the constitution is fine yeoman6987 Aug 2015 #105

The power to tax is the power to destroy melm00se Aug 2015 #11

The power to tax is the power to create a just society...it is in the Constitution! Fred Sanders Aug 2015 #33

You don't mind if melm00se Aug 2015 #37

Hooray for regressive pseudo pigouian fines! Taitertots Aug 2015 #16

I think the term Pigouvian fits nicely here myself...IIRC my grad course in Econ... CTyankee Aug 2015 #19

Do you support regressive psuedo pigouvian taxes? Taitertots Aug 2015 #45

I very much see it as a negative externality. YMMV. CTyankee Aug 2015 #49

Then your opinion is wrong. Taitertots Aug 2015 #51

Many innocent people do have lots to do with the externality. CTyankee Aug 2015 #52

An externality that isn't the result of the market activity Taitertots Aug 2015 #54

All things being equal, that sounds like an argument against car insurance. LanternWaste Aug 2015 #55

"All things being equal"... They are not equivalent, so the comparison is without merit Taitertots Aug 2015 #60

They are not innocent. Darb Aug 2015 #95

What crime did they commit? Taitertots Aug 2015 #108

a tax is not a fine. I see how you switched the language. CTyankee Aug 2015 #56

You're just wrong about Pigiouvian taxes Taitertots Aug 2015 #63

but it is the whole point of "sin" taxes, isn't it? CTyankee Aug 2015 #65

And another economist on this issue CTyankee Aug 2015 #66

Sounds to me like "Guns don't kill people. People kill people." CTyankee Aug 2015 #92

You found a blog that supports your opinion *starts slow clap* Taitertots Aug 2015 #109

back atcha bro CTyankee Aug 2015 #110

"a tax is not a fine". Is the charge for not having health insurance a tax or a fine or a penalty? PoliticAverse Aug 2015 #70

well, you can look it up since that was the question before the court. What did they rule? CTyankee Aug 2015 #72

Likely? I'd say guaranteed. The NRA won't let that pass unchallenged. nt Erich Bloodaxe BSN Aug 2015 #26

State law is the bigger hurdle hack89 Aug 2015 #29

What is not being let to pass unchallenged is NRA insanity. Fred Sanders Aug 2015 #34

Violates state law hack89 Aug 2015 #31

it would be a fine case to push beyond the state to the feds then maxsolomon Aug 2015 #91

Could a conservative city place a tax on abortion procedures? PoliticAverse Aug 2015 #53

No. Abortion is legal, AND it is regulated within the strictures of the various decisions CTyankee Aug 2015 #58

We tax lots of legal and regulated things. PoliticAverse Aug 2015 #69

not in the least similar. Abortion is a constitutionally protected right; cosmetic CTyankee Aug 2015 #71

Most abortions are "elective" procedures (not performed out of medically necessary), PoliticAverse Aug 2015 #73

so what is your point? That women who view their lives as seriously threatened by CTyankee Aug 2015 #74

The point of this discussion of determining the limits of what the government may tax. PoliticAverse Aug 2015 #75

well, what do YOU think? please explain. CTyankee Aug 2015 #76

Doesn't matter what I think. It matters what the courts will hold. PoliticAverse Aug 2015 #77

They would sure have to find a firm precendent to do so. CTyankee Aug 2015 #79

Guns are legal too yeoman6987 Aug 2015 #107

what's your point? my statement had to do with medical care... CTyankee Aug 2015 #111

It had to do with abortion which you said was legal yeoman6987 Aug 2015 #112

well, yes (maybe we can get Heller reversed with a Dem appointing the next CTyankee Aug 2015 #113

If It Were Up to Me... weknowvino2 Aug 2015 #57

Sounds like a boon for gun stores in surrounding cities Freddie Stubbs Aug 2015 #59

Yes, and the tax's proponents are aware of it but since it can't be done state wide CTyankee Aug 2015 #67

There's a reason it can't be enacted state wide, GGJohn Aug 2015 #81

Oh, you again. well, that won't take long to fix. bye. CTyankee Aug 2015 #84

That's your answer to someone giving you info? GGJohn Aug 2015 #86

Info? Darb Aug 2015 #96

I meant exactly what I said. eom. GGJohn Aug 2015 #101

Buy outside of city limits...save some money. ileus Aug 2015 #61

I have a friend who lives close to a gun store on US 99 in the city limits maxsolomon Aug 2015 #90

way too little but better than no action at all wordpix Aug 2015 #62

Hate to burst your gleeful bubble, GGJohn Aug 2015 #85

Pre-emptive laws are for cowards. Darb Aug 2015 #98

Hate to burst your bubble, well, no I don't, GGJohn Aug 2015 #103

I wouldn't mind a reasonable tax. Turin_C3PO Aug 2015 #64