City considers fee for guns, ammunition

[SecularMotion]

Leaders in St. Petersburg, Florida are considering adding a fee to guns and ammunition purchases in an effort to curb growing violence in the city.

Councilman Karl Nurse said the fee would be nominal and would go towards gun violence prevention efforts.

"It would not be enough money to prevent people from buying guns, and that is not the goal," Nurse told TampaBay.com. "It's not people legally buying guns that are the issue. The issue is, 'how do we reduce the flow of illegal guns to felons, children, mentally ill, and how do we pay for efforts to deal with the results of gun violence?"

Florida law prohibits cities from imposing local taxes on firearms but Nurse said he's meeting with the city's attorney to discuss options related to a fee. Other options could include using the revenue generated by the fee to fund the purchase of gun locks or buyback programs.

http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2016/01/city_considers_fee_for_guns_am.html

[JonathanRackham]

1. A sin tax is a great idea.

Can this be extrapolated onto rolling papers, bongs, head shops and drug dealers? The majority of recreational drug users are peaceful and passive but there are some who create problems for all and this should be funded appropriately.

[jonno99]

27. +1

[Duckhunter935]

2. good for the stores

Just outside of city limits and the city will lose tax revenue

[branford]

3. Don't the politicians realize the costs of free speech and assembly.

Cities and towns are going bankrupt.

The disruption to city and private services, law enforcement overtime and emergency services, sanitation, and when things go awry, judiciary and incarceration expenses, etc. People need to pay a reasonable fee whenever they gather or publicly express their opinions. Not a large enough fee to dissuade them, of course, just to cover the inevitable cost to the taxpayers. Such a proposal is most assuredly not a tax on constitutional rights, just a cost-shifting fee mechanism. Given the incompetent and corrupt quality of many elected politicians, if the assembly and speech fee proposal are successful, a voting fee (not poll tax!) and religious expression and exercise fee are also under consideration.

[ileus]

4. drive to the nearest walturd and LGS outside city limits.

Problem solved.

[MariaThinks]

5. this is good.

[Puha Ekapi]

6. Except for the fact...

...that it won't do a damn thing.

[MariaThinks]

9. it will raise money

and make people who buy guns and ammunition pay their rightful share.

[GGJohn]

11. We already pay our rightful share. eom.

[Duckhunter935]

18. no it will not

Last edited Mon Jan 11, 2016, 11:35 PM - Edit history (1)

People will just go outside the city limits. The city will lose tax revenue and possibly businesses will close, hurting the tax base.

[MariaThinks]

19. well let's cross that bridge when we get to it.

[GGJohn]

21. There won't be any bridge to cross, the pre-emption law is pretty clear on that. eom.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

23. Remember when

the politicians said the lottery would pay for education and tobacco taxes would pay for smoking related illnesses?

[S_B_Jackson]

28. What prevents a St. Pete resident from driving to the nearest

Walmart, gun store, or sporting goods store to purchase ammunition and deprive the city of St. Petersburg of the normal sales tax revenue as well as the "sin tax" revenue they anticipate?

[GGJohn]

8. What makes you think this is good?

You are aware the FL. has a pretty tough pre-emption law with stiff penalties attached don't you?

[MariaThinks]

10. Nothing wrong in having gun owners may their rightful share and nobody

is taking their guns away from them.

[GGJohn]

12. We already pay our rightful share,

and you seemed to miss the part of FL's tough pre-emption law.

[MariaThinks]

14. that tough law isn't working so it needs to be augmented.

[GGJohn]

20. Well, the FL. legislature doesn't think so

and if that town tries to institute a tax on firearms and ammo, either the FL. legislature or the courts are going to give them a what for.

[GGJohn]

13. Nobody here, except you, has said anything about taking firearms away. eom

[MariaThinks]

15. i just wanted to offer my reassurance for maintaining gun rights

[GGJohn]

16. Yeah, somehow, I don't think that was your motive for the post, eom

[MariaThinks]

17. you can't read my mind

[GGJohn]

7. Florida has a pretty tough pre-emption law with stiff penalties attached,

I suspect that this is going to go nowhere, and if they try, the state legislature or the courts will slap this down quickly.

[virginia mountainman]

22. who will get to pay those "stiff penalties"

For those trifling legislators??

I think it won't be them....

[GGJohn]

24. According to FL. law, the local legislatures who try to implement the law

can be removed from office, face jail time and stiff fines.

[virginia mountainman]

25. GOOD!

They are not playing games with the taxpayers money, they are playing games with THEIRS.

Lets just see if there "deep" convictions, match their pocket books. LOL!!

[jonno99]

26. Why go through all the trouble? Why not just make it illegal to commit violent acts with a gun?

[Duckhunter935]

29. that should be illegal

Can't believe it is not already.

[jonno99]

30. Well let's get crackin! Then all we'll need is more gun-free zones

and we'll have this thing licked!

[Duckhunter935]

31. any day now we should start

[jonno99]

32. Hmmm...I'm not feeling the enthusiasm I was hoping for...

[Duckhunter935]

33. lol

[deathrind]

34. Good!!

This does not infringe ownership so tax the hell out of both like they do cigarettes.

Incoming usual suspect qq'ing about this in

3, 2, 1.... Go!

[GGJohn]

35. Not going to happen,

FL. has a very tough pre-emption law that can remove any city or town official, fine them and jail them if they violate the states pre-emption law.
Only the state can set firearm laws, including taxes.

[Eleanors38]

36. In addition to GG's #35, you "can't tax hell out of" a constitutional right...

One can effect your bulked-up tax policy on booze, cigs and drugs (and risk spurring a huge underground economy), but you can't impose those charges where a constitutional right is concerned. SEE: Poll tax, fees for parade permits, charges for police over time, etc. I know from my days of organizing demos in the 60s & 70s. Our volunteer lawyers were the fastest draws in the West when it came to TROs and Stays.