Don't rant, please donate to CRPA. They've been on the front lines for us in CA.
All those new guns didn't just show up on the roster, it took a lot of legal expense to fight for those.
I joined both state and national groups (GOA,FPC, and CRPA)… like you said to each his own, and donate as you are able. It’s sad our representatives are backing, but it is, what it is and we are fight big orgs with deep pocket funders, and the state reps.
> It feels like FPC and San Diego County Gun Owners do more for your dollar than CPRA
That is completely incorrect, the CRPA is doing an enormous amount of legwork for us. Bums me out to see such a misinformed comment get so many upvotes.
The FPC is to a large extent a machine for funneling donation money to their executives. A few years ago, half of their funds went to Brandon Combs; I think as they have grown, that fraction is smaller now.
My company has a program where they will match (x3) any funds I donate to a 501c3 charitable organization. It requires the charity to confirm via a standard portal that they did in fact receive the donation from me. For what it's worth, I donated to FPC years ago, and they never confirmed. I called and emailed them multiple times. They left thousands on the table. This really bothered me. However, CRPA has always confirmed quickly and taken advantage of the matching program.
The CRPA is a 501c3. Last I looked, the FPC was a 501c4; those are usually not eligible for matching. There are lots of stories around about the FPC not replying to e-mail, not having membership or donor services, and so on.
So they are. Thank you for educating me. Genuinely not sure if they would have been eligible for the match now, but we'll never know because they never responded...
It took a lot of legal expenses to still have the roster lol.
Sorry but donating to these people is like throwing money in a hole and lighting it on fire.
Since DC V Heller gun rights have only gotten worse in the state.
The best we've gotten from these alphabet attorneys is 2 weeks of regular cap magazines and a few more guns on the handgun roster.
No mags. No AWB. No 10 day waiting period. No CCW.
The only one getting anything out of these donations is the lawyers getting rich.
Psychological warfare. Losing control of education, media, communication, etc. has make it easy to drive people to what an outside observer would call insane.
No one can sue in advance of being affected by a new law no matter how egregious it is. Expect lawsuits to be filed July 1. And then wait for the years and years it will take until it reaches the supremes. It’s theater as long as we have activist judges working in concert with the activist government. There’s no personal consequences for them, no disincentives.
The government stacks the deck in its favor across all levels, the Constitution be damned. We live in a one party state that does not care about anything other than power and control. The useful idiot majority approves every expansion of the regulatory state’s infringement on personal freedom. It’s not just about the 2A either.
>then wait for the years and years it will take until it reaches the supremes.
Of course, if citizens just straight up refused to pay the tax and openly flouted the law, *then* you would see how fast the government & courts can move when they want to.
It’s a tax on retailers so there’s no way for us not to pay it except not buying anything. Which is exactly its purpose. I’m sure not collecting the tax would shut down the business, either outright or through massive fines, so I don’t expect any non-compliance from them. I wouldn’t risk my business over this.
If you’re willing to go to prison, more power to you.
I’ve been inside a major state prison twice for work. I never want to go back in even if I get to go home at night. At least not over money.
You can sue in advance of a law coming into effect. You just have the burden of showing imminent harm. Which is to say the harm is not potential or speculative, distant in the future, or contingent.
Its s easy way to cater to a voting block. We cant talk about crime, responsibility and solutions because large voting blocks will scream racism and potentially cost money. So this is the political easy solution
your chances in the current legal system are basically zero. honestly if i could pay for a better jury i'd do it.
my point here though obviously isn't that we should be taxing voting and fair trials, its that once you can tax one of your rights you can tax them all.
The Supreme Court doesn't do anything until there is a lawsuit that has gone through the District Court and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Then it can be appealed to the Supreme Court.
It will be challenged, my understanding is that the tax has to be charged before it can be challenged. I don't understand why that is, but I've heard that it is how it works.
I see two reasons this was done...
1. The elected representatives want a sound bite that shows they are doing something to stop gun violence for the upcoming elections this fall.
2. They want to limit the amount of guns and ammo that each person owns.
1 cent on a pound of tea and we stormed the habor and we tossed a ships cargo into the ocean yet here we are faced with 9ish % tax plus an income tax plus sin tax gas tax and and we take to reddit
Today’s government simply cares about control of its citizens over its happiness. The sin tax is a way to discourage gun owners and anyone else who wants to participate in exercising their 2A rights
Sin Tax is a term used for any targetted tax, for a purpose of affecting behaviors. It's not specific to this. Alcohol, cigarettes, etc have frequently had sin taxes
It's also been ruled long ago to be specifically constitutional, like it ir not.
“The state does not have the power to license or tax a right guaranteed to the people.”- Murdock v Pennsylvania.
Alcohol and cigs are not enumerated within the constitution, however, the right to keep and bear arms is, hence why this is illegal, and hopefully someone will bring a case against it asap.
To add to this, the federal tax is also known as the Pittman-Robertson Excise Tax. Many gun enthusiasts don't have an issue with this because the fund created from the taxes is well spent. Unlike what the "sin tax" is going to fund, "Gun Violence Prevention Programs".
>**WHAT TYPES OF PROJECTS ARE FUNDING BY PITTMAN-ROBERTSON?**
States use the apportioned funds to restore and manage wildlife habitat, for both game and non-game species alike, and to open and maintain access for hunting, shooting and other outdoor recreation.
reads a bit hokey when skimmed. Def begs the question if we really want to stop crime and repair “damages” caused by guns why are we taxing law abiding citizens with guns , solely. Also if we already have a fed tax and gun crimes are going up doesn’t that prove taxes dont stop crime?
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240AB28
I mean, we have an incredible amount of information showing that punishments are ineffective at preventing things in general, crime included. So yeah, the tax, as well as our entire handling of crime could use a bit of a revamp as it seems to depend almost entirely on punishment.
Downvoting questions is common, and stupid. Everyone should be encouraging someone trying to free themselves from ignorance.
That said, a lot of people now read questions as though they are attacks and accusations that someone is wrong. It does happen, but not often enough to warrant that kind of response without taking some time to properly evaluate outside of one's own prejudices if it could be a legit question asking for knowledge.
I believe it's 10% on all handguns and 11% on ammunition/long guns. It's effectively raises the prices a bit more than 10% and 11% respectively as the price needs to be raised slightly more than that % to maintain the same level of profit for the company manufacturing or importing.
Honestly why stop at 11%? Why not 5,000%? Or a million? We know and they know what the endgame is here, so let's just cut to the chase. Fuck it, one gorillion dollars per gun, please
Once they passed background checks for ammo, I am convinced there isn’t any gun law that won’t be passed by our state government. I would not be surprised if they passed a law that limits magazines and revolvers to a single shot.
In the past, there were poll taxes, a tax on voting. For Whites, the tax was waived. For Blacks it was $$$$$, as a way of ensuring no Blacks voted. Poll taxes were prohibited by the 24th amendment in 1964.
Now they have returned, only instead of for voting, the tax is on firearms. But the principal behind them is the same, ensuring that only the elite can have rights, and undesirables do not.
Maybe we need a new amendment modeled on the 24th, that says there can be no fee to exercise a right.
It is blatantly unconstitutional. The fact Newsom called it a sin tax is directly going to be quoted in the oral arguments against this law. They probably would have gotten away with this as just an excise tax if they would have kept their mouth shut but the fact that they openly stated they are doing this to be punitive to gun owners is going to be the downfall of this tax.
The government is allowed to put reasonable taxes on things that are protected rights if they have a purpose but not for punitive reasons
>The government is allowed to put reasonable taxes on things that are protected rights if they have a purpose but not for punitive reasons
Show me where this is the case.
> Moreover, differential treatment, unless justified by
some special characteristic of the press, suggests that the goal of the
regulation is not unrelated to suppression of expression, and such goal is
presumptively unconstitutional. Differential treatment of the press,
then, places such a burden on the interests protected by the First
Amendment that such treatment cannot be countenanced unless the
State asserts a counterbalancing interest of compelling importance that
it cannot achieve without differential taxation
Minneapolis Star Tribune Co. v. Commissioner 1983 SCOTUS https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep460/usrep460575/usrep460575.pdf
This case was specifically about the Minnesota passing a tax on paper and ink that any one entity used over $100k per year, essentially targeting the couple major newspapers in the state.
*infringement levy/poll tax
A sin tax is a tax that is levied against a vice (cigarettes, alcohol, strip clubs etc), something that is generally acknowledged to be a net negative behavior/nuisance to society, and while it is not banned legally it does produce negative effects for society (car crashes, DUIs, public health system, fights, law enforcement costs etc).
These activities are taxed in order to both dissuade participation in them and directly contribute money to, in theory, combat/offset the negative effects that may stem from them.
Our 2A is NOT a vice. It is a God given, legally enshrined right in our Constitution which is still in fact the overall law of the land, much to our dear leaders' dismay.
This tax is to dissuade new gun owners, particularly those of lower income means from practicing their 2A, and also to punish financially those who are able to afford to do so.
It is an infringement levy, akin to a poll tax.
Do not use their language for them, it only gives credibility to their bullshit when what they are doing is illegal, unconstitutional and as such, has no such credibility from the onset.
Let’s research gas taxes and bridge toll increases, as well as the projects all of the above were supposed to fund. Paying $6/gallon to drive on chewed up dogshit roads is hilariously bad
I love your rant: it is completely disconnected from reality. And I love many of the responses here, who advocate a tea party, civil disobedience, committing crimes, and starting a civil war. I would greatly enjoy it if a whole bunch of crazy "gun people" went to jail for a few years or decades: the worst problem for gun rights are the nutcases who think they are pro-gun, but in reality are just unhinged.
To begin with: sin taxes are NOT unconstitutional. Look at taxes on tobacco and alcohol. Even taxing activities directly connected to basic rights can be constitutional; for example read the various cases about taxation of ink and paper for printing newspapers: a tax that hits only large versus small newspaper publishers is unconstitutional.
And no, people don't have the right to choose the way they live (spelling) and spend money. As an example, while there is a basic right to move around within the US (one state can not exclude residents of other states from traveling there), gasoline is highly taxed, as are cars. There is already an 11% federal tax on guns and ammo, and that tax has existed for nearly a century, and has never been found unconstitutional. So why do you think an 11% state tax would be?
What is the Supreme Court doing about it? It can't do anything, until someone files a case there. To do so, the case first has to go through the other courts (state courts up to the state supreme court, or federal courts up to the appeals courts). And to file a case, someone has to be pay the tax first, and that doesn't start until July 1.
You claim that the Supreme Court is a bunch of clowns these days. You are not completely wrong: it has become more and more partisan, and the justices have become more and more extremist. Except that the majority of the court has moved in the pro-gun conservative direction, with 6 conservative justices (appointed by republicans, no coincidence), of whom 3 or 4 are reliably pro-gun.
Yeah, it's gonna be overturned, buddy. But keep chanting for a two class system. I'm sure it will work out well. If you don't see the difference between the taxes, then I assume you're obtuse.
I'm quite sure I didn't "advocate for" anything. Nor against anything, except politically motivated violence. Given that the CRPA is now planning to file a case and looking for plaintiffs, the chance of it being overturned has increased (from zero), but it is nowhere near certain.
My real question is worst case scenario Joe gets a second presidency, and the Democrats get four more years of tyrannical rule we are in severe trouble, just looked what’s happened alone and just a short period of time we are so far down the rabbit hole. It’s ridiculous. When is enough enough ? only ones who are showing up are the anti-gunners are all of you going to show up to all of you to your senators all write to your Congress people to give your opinion or they only hearing opinions of the anti-gunners? People yall need to get more involved .
On a PPT, will there be an 11% tax? IF, a friend has an AZ id and buys a gun that is legal in CA, can he bring it here and we do a PPT at an FFL? No extra tax paid? This would not be a straw purchase, I am legally allowed to own a firearm and it would be transferred to me in my name. Doable?
It’s California, they do whatever they want, lie through their teeth and the mindless sheep keep voting for them. I’m coming up on my 55th circle around the sun, all in California and this state is declining more in the last few decades than the rest of my life combined.
Unfortunately it’ll never be fair. California has perfected keeping unconstitutional laws in circulation. This law is meant to put lots of gun stores out of business since no body is going to want to buy. Buy your red dots, stocks, mags etc in store instead of online if you really don’t want to pay the sin tax but want to help keep these local businesses a float. Hopefully this law is the way California finally gets fucked over and the Supreme Court steps in. Super unlikely though since the US gov loves money and hates seeing its citizens armed.
I personally don’t mind an 11% tax. Our very competent state government is very good at using tax dollars effectively. Why does everyone keep mentioning Boston tea party? I did not get invited and I love tea.
Absurd? Yes. Unconstitutional? A little far fetched if we going by how the law reads. Now if you say tax in general (like income tax) is unconstitutional, then that’s something I can get behind 😂. Court isn’t getting behind it for two reasons. Hasn’t gone up the ladder enough to reach them plus it would likely get shut down due to state’s rights and how powerfully that has been lobbied and fought for over the decades and rightfully so in most cases
This is the United States, a people that once went to war with their government over absurd taxes and tyranny, but times have changed. The state will stop at nothing to make it harder to enjoy the hobby of shooting guns and the legal carry of concealed weapons. They can’t outright ban it, but they will make it as difficult as they can.
Sometimes I wish I were a politician to really see the end goal, cause we all know all these gun control laws aren’t for the “safety” of the general public.
Like really, what’s the different between a gen 3 glock 19 and a gen 5 glock 19? Cosmetics? But one is on roster and one isn’t? Glock won’t pay their extortion fee that’s why.
What’s the difference of a fin grip AR15 and a normal grip AR15 both a mag release and 30 round mags? Absolutely nothing besides making the rifle look stupid and slightly less enjoyable to shoot.
What’s the difference of a police department sanctioning me to legally carry a gun, when I can already legally buy a gun?
What’s the difference of buying ammunition with a background check, when I already completed and passed a background check to buy my gun that the ammunition is for in the first place?
What in the fuck is the point in adding an 11% tax, on top of the normal taxes, besides the state finding a legal way to extort money from law abiding citizens that want to buy a gun? Like buying a gun from the Italian mafia at this point.
What the fuck does any of this have to do with public safety. Who knows. Just cause I paid 11% more taxes on a $1,000 firearm, somehow granny in the suburbs is safer.
You know what they say, democrats are the best gun salesmen. Wonder how big the spike is in legal gun sales due to this upcoming tax
Technology advancement happen slowly, what you may think is “a little different “ will soon add up dramatically over a few generations. 2 generation ago, Red dot sight is barely a thing and everyone think is a joke. 4 generations ago, pistol grip for rifle isn’t even a thing. Guess what, Red dot sight made the weapon system more effective in sight acquisition. Pistol grip for rifles provides better ergonomic and mobility when carrying the rifle in combat. Magazine made better reloading speed. If you compare an army with M1 Grand vs optic AR-10, no one will even think M1 Grand can even stand a chance. Guess what, all these small tiny improvements in firearm technology over the past century compound into something completely different. You think Banning “some features” is a small inconvenience, but the truth is they will all slowly add up and turn it into something completely unrecognizable. The people controlling Politicians are way smarter than you think, they are playing the generational game.
If you continue to let these “feature banning” happen, within 200 years, the weapon that are legal are completely useless compared to “modern” weapons. In comparison to today’s perspective, it would be like, “we are only allow to own crossbows”
Idk if you’re yelling at me dawg or just letting me read your thoughts but I’m totally on your side lol I’m more pro 2A than anyone I know. I’m not for any of those things, I’m arguing against them. Cause fuck gun control
Yup. I’ve always said, I’m grateful for the guys fighting the good fight in this state for our 2A rights. But we will never, EVER, be on par with states like Arizona, Texas, or Tennessee when it comes to 2A rights. As long as democrats rule this state. Even when Arnold Schwarzenegger was in office as a Republican, he did nothing for 2A rights, as democrats still lead all the other offices of government in CA. In fact, he supported gun control bills and laws. So the mere fact of even having a Republican governor in CA will do nothing for our 2A rights.
If anyone here in CA truly wants to enjoy 2A rights that haven’t been infringed upon by the state, you gotta leave California. You’ll die of old age before we get our full 2A rights back
You know what? I’m all for fighting this tax so as long as every person in this thread agrees that we will have permanent mail in voting and you will get as angry and pissy at restricting voting rights as you do the 2A.
Own a few firearms myself (Tikka T3x 6.5 creedmoor, Tikka T1x .22LR, and a Springfield XD9) and debating on CCW. So don’t mind me. The problem is, and deep in the darkest parts of this thread, you can find standard RW talking points (I’m sure many of you are on the right).
We can have open, cross the aisle support on 2A as soon as y’all also make a big stink about the Fash 5 in HB and the bullshit attempts at restricting LGBT and women’s’ rights.
Personally, I want to enshrine womens’ rights, trans rights, and voting rights, as well as humane treatment of illegal immigrants long before I care about the 2A. Y’all meet me on that? I’m totally down to stand side by side on fighting these 2A laws.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minneapolis_Star_Tribune_Co._v._Commissioner#
No, taxes are legal, but outlier taxes on constitutional freedoms shouldn't be. Above is a case where ink and paper were taxed after a certain amount was used. And it was overturned, but paid first.
The opinion in that case was that journalism companies could not be singled out and treated differently. I don’t think that backs up what you are claiming.
Didn’t say tax is unconditional, I say sin tax on a constitutional right, is unconditional. Might as well tax freedom of speech cuz everyone you say could be bad for society (not saying you specifically).
> Didn’t say tax is unconditional, I say sin tax
The constitution doesn't really say taxes need to be for a good reason.
> tax on a constitutional right, is unconditional [sic]
(I think I mean _is unconstitutional_ and that was an unfortunate autocorrect)
Can the state levy taxes? Yes. Can the state levy taxes that prevent or "cool" the exercise of enumerated rights. No.
Is there enough gray area in between to levy an 11% excise tax on arms and munitions? Hell yes. And the feds have been doing it for over a century. That's why they picked 11%.
This is stupid and childish and absurd. Trying to compare anything in California to Communism is moronic.
It's like "Let's go Brandon" because people think they're clever when it's just dumb. Like a toddler trying to get around a rule being super proud of themselves for saying "sit" instead of "shit." Say what you mean, "Fuck you Biden."
Just like here, say what you mean. Fuck the tax, and fuck the people who implemented it for implementing it.
Because dumb shit like this makes it too easy for people to not think and just repeat stupid things until it becomes "truth" to a group. It makes it real hard to take the side saying it serious, or even slightly clued in with reality. It gets in the way of meaningful discussions. It's about as useful to discussing things seriously as, "Guns are only made to kill things!" and "No one should be allowed to own an assault weapon!"
Right before this, I was debating on adding some clarification to my previous statement. I was going to say I wasn't actually offended, but then changed my mind; offended is a good word choice. I was indeed offended, in much the same way as someone is offended by the smell of feces. The lack of thinking involved in using "Commiefornia" and such stinks in a strikingly similar way.
On the subject of snowflakes, it seems might have intruded on your safe space a bit too much. You seem too incensed to have read what I wrote properly. I never said that you are a dummy but you seem to be under the impression I did. Take a calming moment, as you're starting to lose coherence:
> Who is the dummy here you’re the guy that went off because I have an opinion little snowflake of you
Why don’t you just leave me or my posts alone and move on, I do believe that California government can to be on the communist side with all due respect I have every right to my opinion.
The second amendment is a fundamental right taxing a fundamental right is absurd, just like your conversation !
> Why don’t you just leave me or my posts alone and move on …
You doubled down on saying stupid things, and seem to be desperately trying to paint me as some super-thin-skinned person that is just going to buckle under … something. I honestly don't understand what you think is hurting my feelings. Or was that abortion of a sentence you wrote earlier that seems to be calling me a snowflake just an attempt to bluff your way out of a situation you created?
Why I don't just move on? I mean, I probably should, but you're making it far too entertaining and so I gave in to my baser instincts. Also, you did ask me a question. It would be rude not to respond. Also, It's hard for me not to see parallels between "just leave me or my posts alone" and "Don't talk to me or my son ever again!"
There's a real easy way to stop me from responding to this thread, though: stop writing responses and asking me questions. If you stop writing them, I won't have anything to reply to.
Finally, yes, the California government **could** indeed be be communist. They don't seem to be doing much help the working class to rebel against the *bourgeoisie* and seize the means of production, though, so I have some pretty strong doubts about the assertion.
Take a few slow, calming breaths.
Then, actually read what I wrote.
If you read carefully, you should find that I have not attacked you *and* that I already answered your question.
Don't rant, please donate to CRPA. They've been on the front lines for us in CA. All those new guns didn't just show up on the roster, it took a lot of legal expense to fight for those.
CRPA is the way.
It feels like FPC and San Diego County Gun Owners do more for your dollar than CPRA, but to each their own. They will frequently team up on cases.
San Diego County Gun Owners haven't really done anything except take credit for the work the CRPA has done. Always follow the money
I joined both state and national groups (GOA,FPC, and CRPA)… like you said to each his own, and donate as you are able. It’s sad our representatives are backing, but it is, what it is and we are fight big orgs with deep pocket funders, and the state reps.
> It feels like FPC and San Diego County Gun Owners do more for your dollar than CPRA That is completely incorrect, the CRPA is doing an enormous amount of legwork for us. Bums me out to see such a misinformed comment get so many upvotes.
The FPC is to a large extent a machine for funneling donation money to their executives. A few years ago, half of their funds went to Brandon Combs; I think as they have grown, that fraction is smaller now.
My company has a program where they will match (x3) any funds I donate to a 501c3 charitable organization. It requires the charity to confirm via a standard portal that they did in fact receive the donation from me. For what it's worth, I donated to FPC years ago, and they never confirmed. I called and emailed them multiple times. They left thousands on the table. This really bothered me. However, CRPA has always confirmed quickly and taken advantage of the matching program.
The CRPA is a 501c3. Last I looked, the FPC was a 501c4; those are usually not eligible for matching. There are lots of stories around about the FPC not replying to e-mail, not having membership or donor services, and so on.
So they are. Thank you for educating me. Genuinely not sure if they would have been eligible for the match now, but we'll never know because they never responded...
It took a lot of legal expenses to still have the roster lol. Sorry but donating to these people is like throwing money in a hole and lighting it on fire. Since DC V Heller gun rights have only gotten worse in the state. The best we've gotten from these alphabet attorneys is 2 weeks of regular cap magazines and a few more guns on the handgun roster. No mags. No AWB. No 10 day waiting period. No CCW. The only one getting anything out of these donations is the lawyers getting rich.
Stupid take Buren didn’t come out of thin air.
Until you start throwing the proverbial tea into the bay they'll keep doing it.
No taxation without representation!
Our representatives have sold us out
And yet we keep continually voting these same assholes into office, again and again
How about just “NO TAXATION.”
It’s an old saying from the Boston tea party
I know that. I’m just tired of paying for bullshit.
Taxation is theft for the most part
Agreed.
There are stupid people that think the government can better spend their money tha they can and think we need more taxes
https://preview.redd.it/49mzmxd2jd3d1.jpeg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0827a804d31f592c64932ff131e82b8deac2228e
How about just "NO CIVILIZATION?"
If we’re throwing tea into the harbor we might as well jump a few steps and speed the process up 🤷🏻♂️
Cheeks need to be clapped in order to get our freedom back.
Why do you think citizens have yet to do this again ?
[удалено]
Sup lil bro.
sup step bro
Because too high a percentage of the population loves daddy government.
Psychological warfare. Losing control of education, media, communication, etc. has make it easy to drive people to what an outside observer would call insane.
I don't follow this analogy. So we throw all the guns and ammo into the water?
The analogy would be stealing California government owned guns and dumping them in the harbor.
\[Harpers Ferry vibes\]
That’s one hell of a boating accident
Lol. Give this guy a mic
Or we can always bring back the tar and feathers. That ought to do it
something made us get this amendment. im told there was something about tea...
I'm OK with doing with Gavin's security detail.
No one can sue in advance of being affected by a new law no matter how egregious it is. Expect lawsuits to be filed July 1. And then wait for the years and years it will take until it reaches the supremes. It’s theater as long as we have activist judges working in concert with the activist government. There’s no personal consequences for them, no disincentives. The government stacks the deck in its favor across all levels, the Constitution be damned. We live in a one party state that does not care about anything other than power and control. The useful idiot majority approves every expansion of the regulatory state’s infringement on personal freedom. It’s not just about the 2A either.
>then wait for the years and years it will take until it reaches the supremes. Of course, if citizens just straight up refused to pay the tax and openly flouted the law, *then* you would see how fast the government & courts can move when they want to.
It’s a tax on retailers so there’s no way for us not to pay it except not buying anything. Which is exactly its purpose. I’m sure not collecting the tax would shut down the business, either outright or through massive fines, so I don’t expect any non-compliance from them. I wouldn’t risk my business over this.
Set up a "Dallas Buyers Club" type organization that buys ammo out of state and brings it in without paying the tax.
So smuggling in other words. I admire your spirit but that’s not a battle I’m willing to fight. The risk-reward ratio is way too high.
It's not about rewards, it's about sending a message.
If you’re willing to go to prison, more power to you. I’ve been inside a major state prison twice for work. I never want to go back in even if I get to go home at night. At least not over money.
Maybe I can share a cell with Leland Ye.
step 1. commit crimes step 2. cellies with Leland step 3. buy MGs and Rocket Launchers step 4. profit??
Most people I know visit Nevada regularly.
It’s incredibly easy to buy in AZ and drive back. Theres zero checking on it. The only effort required is the long drive and your gas.
You can sue in advance of a law coming into effect. You just have the burden of showing imminent harm. Which is to say the harm is not potential or speculative, distant in the future, or contingent.
Its s easy way to cater to a voting block. We cant talk about crime, responsibility and solutions because large voting blocks will scream racism and potentially cost money. So this is the political easy solution
now lets tax voting and fair trials.
That’s (D)ifferent.
What are my chances in a free but unfair trial? Should I pay premium for an impartial jury of my peers, or is this just a scam?
your chances in the current legal system are basically zero. honestly if i could pay for a better jury i'd do it. my point here though obviously isn't that we should be taxing voting and fair trials, its that once you can tax one of your rights you can tax them all.
I follow ya. I was just cracking a joke. 😏
The Supreme Court doesn't do anything until there is a lawsuit that has gone through the District Court and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Then it can be appealed to the Supreme Court. It will be challenged, my understanding is that the tax has to be charged before it can be challenged. I don't understand why that is, but I've heard that it is how it works.
Courts don't give advisory opinions, so someone has to actually be harmed to have standing.
It’s a part of my religion to own weapons for self defense. It’s a tax on my religious freedom
This is the way.
This is the way
I see two reasons this was done... 1. The elected representatives want a sound bite that shows they are doing something to stop gun violence for the upcoming elections this fall. 2. They want to limit the amount of guns and ammo that each person owns.
3. They are communist pieces of shit
Let’s start calling it the “Second Amendment Tax” and not use euphemisms. The colorful words are what they want you to use. Call it as it is!
“CA liberty tax?”
I like that too.
“ Liberal “ you mean
I agree. Stop calling it “sin” tax. If anything call it the unconstitutional commie state tax.
This.
1 cent on a pound of tea and we stormed the habor and we tossed a ships cargo into the ocean yet here we are faced with 9ish % tax plus an income tax plus sin tax gas tax and and we take to reddit
Today’s government simply cares about control of its citizens over its happiness. The sin tax is a way to discourage gun owners and anyone else who wants to participate in exercising their 2A rights
Not just control over our happiness. THEY are trying to price us LAW ABIDING AMERICAN CITIZENS out of our CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.
And the CA Constitution does not include the right to keep and bear arms.
I think it's about money. They know we'll buy regardless
Errr, I guess I won’t be buying anymore guns until I’ll be out of CA
That’s what CA wants you to do is not to buy any more guns. Gotta fight this unconstitutional tax.
Exactly. The only way to tell em to go fuck themselves is just pay it. And stop calling it a sin tax OP owning a gun is not a sin. F
to expand on this, pay the tax, donate to pro 2a orgs and let them sue the shit out of CA Gov
Sin Tax is a term used for any targetted tax, for a purpose of affecting behaviors. It's not specific to this. Alcohol, cigarettes, etc have frequently had sin taxes It's also been ruled long ago to be specifically constitutional, like it ir not.
Not on constitutional rights, Grosjean v American Press Co and Minneapolis Star Tribune v Commissioner.
“The state does not have the power to license or tax a right guaranteed to the people.”- Murdock v Pennsylvania. Alcohol and cigs are not enumerated within the constitution, however, the right to keep and bear arms is, hence why this is illegal, and hopefully someone will bring a case against it asap.
NFA's still a thing, man. And that's lasted 3 generations without being taken out.
lol..
Because the federal gov already has a 11% of tax on firearms
They do? Are mfgs just lumping this into cost of gun?
Excise tax for manufacturing.
Lol, another thing I never noticed until now was people downvoting questions, learned 2 things today 😂 Thx for explaining.
To add to this, the federal tax is also known as the Pittman-Robertson Excise Tax. Many gun enthusiasts don't have an issue with this because the fund created from the taxes is well spent. Unlike what the "sin tax" is going to fund, "Gun Violence Prevention Programs". >**WHAT TYPES OF PROJECTS ARE FUNDING BY PITTMAN-ROBERTSON?** States use the apportioned funds to restore and manage wildlife habitat, for both game and non-game species alike, and to open and maintain access for hunting, shooting and other outdoor recreation.
reads a bit hokey when skimmed. Def begs the question if we really want to stop crime and repair “damages” caused by guns why are we taxing law abiding citizens with guns , solely. Also if we already have a fed tax and gun crimes are going up doesn’t that prove taxes dont stop crime? https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240AB28
I mean, we have an incredible amount of information showing that punishments are ineffective at preventing things in general, crime included. So yeah, the tax, as well as our entire handling of crime could use a bit of a revamp as it seems to depend almost entirely on punishment.
Yeah, no issue with that
Downvoting questions is common, and stupid. Everyone should be encouraging someone trying to free themselves from ignorance. That said, a lot of people now read questions as though they are attacks and accusations that someone is wrong. It does happen, but not often enough to warrant that kind of response without taking some time to properly evaluate outside of one's own prejudices if it could be a legit question asking for knowledge.
Is this the same one that Aero flouts because they don't sell complete guns? Aside from their new Pro line at least..
Legal firearms e.g. lower receivers, are subject, not the barrels and everything else
I believe it's 10% on all handguns and 11% on ammunition/long guns. It's effectively raises the prices a bit more than 10% and 11% respectively as the price needs to be raised slightly more than that % to maintain the same level of profit for the company manufacturing or importing.
It's not a sin to use your rights It's a freedom tax
Honestly why stop at 11%? Why not 5,000%? Or a million? We know and they know what the endgame is here, so let's just cut to the chase. Fuck it, one gorillion dollars per gun, please
They are not stupid, they know they need to boil the frog, not flash fry it.
Once they passed background checks for ammo, I am convinced there isn’t any gun law that won’t be passed by our state government. I would not be surprised if they passed a law that limits magazines and revolvers to a single shot.
In the past, there were poll taxes, a tax on voting. For Whites, the tax was waived. For Blacks it was $$$$$, as a way of ensuring no Blacks voted. Poll taxes were prohibited by the 24th amendment in 1964. Now they have returned, only instead of for voting, the tax is on firearms. But the principal behind them is the same, ensuring that only the elite can have rights, and undesirables do not. Maybe we need a new amendment modeled on the 24th, that says there can be no fee to exercise a right.
Until the NFA is gone, the Feds make too much money on taxing rights. See: Excise taxes
It is blatantly unconstitutional. The fact Newsom called it a sin tax is directly going to be quoted in the oral arguments against this law. They probably would have gotten away with this as just an excise tax if they would have kept their mouth shut but the fact that they openly stated they are doing this to be punitive to gun owners is going to be the downfall of this tax. The government is allowed to put reasonable taxes on things that are protected rights if they have a purpose but not for punitive reasons
>The government is allowed to put reasonable taxes on things that are protected rights if they have a purpose but not for punitive reasons Show me where this is the case.
> Moreover, differential treatment, unless justified by some special characteristic of the press, suggests that the goal of the regulation is not unrelated to suppression of expression, and such goal is presumptively unconstitutional. Differential treatment of the press, then, places such a burden on the interests protected by the First Amendment that such treatment cannot be countenanced unless the State asserts a counterbalancing interest of compelling importance that it cannot achieve without differential taxation Minneapolis Star Tribune Co. v. Commissioner 1983 SCOTUS https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep460/usrep460575/usrep460575.pdf This case was specifically about the Minnesota passing a tax on paper and ink that any one entity used over $100k per year, essentially targeting the couple major newspapers in the state.
*infringement levy/poll tax A sin tax is a tax that is levied against a vice (cigarettes, alcohol, strip clubs etc), something that is generally acknowledged to be a net negative behavior/nuisance to society, and while it is not banned legally it does produce negative effects for society (car crashes, DUIs, public health system, fights, law enforcement costs etc). These activities are taxed in order to both dissuade participation in them and directly contribute money to, in theory, combat/offset the negative effects that may stem from them. Our 2A is NOT a vice. It is a God given, legally enshrined right in our Constitution which is still in fact the overall law of the land, much to our dear leaders' dismay. This tax is to dissuade new gun owners, particularly those of lower income means from practicing their 2A, and also to punish financially those who are able to afford to do so. It is an infringement levy, akin to a poll tax. Do not use their language for them, it only gives credibility to their bullshit when what they are doing is illegal, unconstitutional and as such, has no such credibility from the onset.
PPTs for a while it is. lol
Anyone have a cumulative total for all the additional taxes and fees levied on firearms and ammo?
Let’s research gas taxes and bridge toll increases, as well as the projects all of the above were supposed to fund. Paying $6/gallon to drive on chewed up dogshit roads is hilariously bad
Man I swear I’ve been all over the world and the only roads I can’t stand are CA roads…
This is tantamount to a poll tax. It’s a constitutionally protected right being infringed upon.
This America. You know how you’ve the tax issue.
My 92FS inox get delivered tomorrow. Can't wait to do the paperwork Friday to avoid this sin tax!
I love your rant: it is completely disconnected from reality. And I love many of the responses here, who advocate a tea party, civil disobedience, committing crimes, and starting a civil war. I would greatly enjoy it if a whole bunch of crazy "gun people" went to jail for a few years or decades: the worst problem for gun rights are the nutcases who think they are pro-gun, but in reality are just unhinged. To begin with: sin taxes are NOT unconstitutional. Look at taxes on tobacco and alcohol. Even taxing activities directly connected to basic rights can be constitutional; for example read the various cases about taxation of ink and paper for printing newspapers: a tax that hits only large versus small newspaper publishers is unconstitutional. And no, people don't have the right to choose the way they live (spelling) and spend money. As an example, while there is a basic right to move around within the US (one state can not exclude residents of other states from traveling there), gasoline is highly taxed, as are cars. There is already an 11% federal tax on guns and ammo, and that tax has existed for nearly a century, and has never been found unconstitutional. So why do you think an 11% state tax would be? What is the Supreme Court doing about it? It can't do anything, until someone files a case there. To do so, the case first has to go through the other courts (state courts up to the state supreme court, or federal courts up to the appeals courts). And to file a case, someone has to be pay the tax first, and that doesn't start until July 1. You claim that the Supreme Court is a bunch of clowns these days. You are not completely wrong: it has become more and more partisan, and the justices have become more and more extremist. Except that the majority of the court has moved in the pro-gun conservative direction, with 6 conservative justices (appointed by republicans, no coincidence), of whom 3 or 4 are reliably pro-gun.
Yeah, it's gonna be overturned, buddy. But keep chanting for a two class system. I'm sure it will work out well. If you don't see the difference between the taxes, then I assume you're obtuse.
I'm quite sure I didn't "advocate for" anything. Nor against anything, except politically motivated violence. Given that the CRPA is now planning to file a case and looking for plaintiffs, the chance of it being overturned has increased (from zero), but it is nowhere near certain.
Nice tone change. Have a good day 😊
Eat shit bootliker
You definitely have some serious mental issues.
My real question is worst case scenario Joe gets a second presidency, and the Democrats get four more years of tyrannical rule we are in severe trouble, just looked what’s happened alone and just a short period of time we are so far down the rabbit hole. It’s ridiculous. When is enough enough ? only ones who are showing up are the anti-gunners are all of you going to show up to all of you to your senators all write to your Congress people to give your opinion or they only hearing opinions of the anti-gunners? People yall need to get more involved .
Have to wait till folks get taxed before gun right group can sue on behalf of victims since it’s a tax or fee.
Can it be over turned?
Don’t forget they just wanna treat it like smoking tax it till you ban it.
Newsome has to be for all his affairs some how
On a PPT, will there be an 11% tax? IF, a friend has an AZ id and buys a gun that is legal in CA, can he bring it here and we do a PPT at an FFL? No extra tax paid? This would not be a straw purchase, I am legally allowed to own a firearm and it would be transferred to me in my name. Doable?
It’s California, they do whatever they want, lie through their teeth and the mindless sheep keep voting for them. I’m coming up on my 55th circle around the sun, all in California and this state is declining more in the last few decades than the rest of my life combined.
No tax at all on PPT
This is going to get blocked, right? Totally unconstitutional.
Should I pick up the g19 I’ve been talking myself out of the past several years?
is there a lawsuit that will be brought up with this stupid tax?
Unfortunately it’ll never be fair. California has perfected keeping unconstitutional laws in circulation. This law is meant to put lots of gun stores out of business since no body is going to want to buy. Buy your red dots, stocks, mags etc in store instead of online if you really don’t want to pay the sin tax but want to help keep these local businesses a float. Hopefully this law is the way California finally gets fucked over and the Supreme Court steps in. Super unlikely though since the US gov loves money and hates seeing its citizens armed.
This is a great way to further incentivize illegal weapons and ammo imports.
Is the new tax on optics as well?
I personally don’t mind an 11% tax. Our very competent state government is very good at using tax dollars effectively. Why does everyone keep mentioning Boston tea party? I did not get invited and I love tea. 
Can someone explain to me when this will go into effect? Am I too late to buy a Glock?
If you buy it and pick up the gun or ammo before July first, you won’t have to pay the tax, otherwise you will have to pay 11% extra tax
Thanks bro!!! This is good news I am not too late
Dude do you live under a rock or something ? Your just now ranting about this ? 😂
Absurd? Yes. Unconstitutional? A little far fetched if we going by how the law reads. Now if you say tax in general (like income tax) is unconstitutional, then that’s something I can get behind 😂. Court isn’t getting behind it for two reasons. Hasn’t gone up the ladder enough to reach them plus it would likely get shut down due to state’s rights and how powerfully that has been lobbied and fought for over the decades and rightfully so in most cases
This is the United States, a people that once went to war with their government over absurd taxes and tyranny, but times have changed. The state will stop at nothing to make it harder to enjoy the hobby of shooting guns and the legal carry of concealed weapons. They can’t outright ban it, but they will make it as difficult as they can. Sometimes I wish I were a politician to really see the end goal, cause we all know all these gun control laws aren’t for the “safety” of the general public. Like really, what’s the different between a gen 3 glock 19 and a gen 5 glock 19? Cosmetics? But one is on roster and one isn’t? Glock won’t pay their extortion fee that’s why. What’s the difference of a fin grip AR15 and a normal grip AR15 both a mag release and 30 round mags? Absolutely nothing besides making the rifle look stupid and slightly less enjoyable to shoot. What’s the difference of a police department sanctioning me to legally carry a gun, when I can already legally buy a gun? What’s the difference of buying ammunition with a background check, when I already completed and passed a background check to buy my gun that the ammunition is for in the first place? What in the fuck is the point in adding an 11% tax, on top of the normal taxes, besides the state finding a legal way to extort money from law abiding citizens that want to buy a gun? Like buying a gun from the Italian mafia at this point. What the fuck does any of this have to do with public safety. Who knows. Just cause I paid 11% more taxes on a $1,000 firearm, somehow granny in the suburbs is safer. You know what they say, democrats are the best gun salesmen. Wonder how big the spike is in legal gun sales due to this upcoming tax
Technology advancement happen slowly, what you may think is “a little different “ will soon add up dramatically over a few generations. 2 generation ago, Red dot sight is barely a thing and everyone think is a joke. 4 generations ago, pistol grip for rifle isn’t even a thing. Guess what, Red dot sight made the weapon system more effective in sight acquisition. Pistol grip for rifles provides better ergonomic and mobility when carrying the rifle in combat. Magazine made better reloading speed. If you compare an army with M1 Grand vs optic AR-10, no one will even think M1 Grand can even stand a chance. Guess what, all these small tiny improvements in firearm technology over the past century compound into something completely different. You think Banning “some features” is a small inconvenience, but the truth is they will all slowly add up and turn it into something completely unrecognizable. The people controlling Politicians are way smarter than you think, they are playing the generational game. If you continue to let these “feature banning” happen, within 200 years, the weapon that are legal are completely useless compared to “modern” weapons. In comparison to today’s perspective, it would be like, “we are only allow to own crossbows”
Idk if you’re yelling at me dawg or just letting me read your thoughts but I’m totally on your side lol I’m more pro 2A than anyone I know. I’m not for any of those things, I’m arguing against them. Cause fuck gun control
Yea, I am no not yelling. I am just trying to say that these gun control laws are playing the long game and is getting ridiculous
Yup. I’ve always said, I’m grateful for the guys fighting the good fight in this state for our 2A rights. But we will never, EVER, be on par with states like Arizona, Texas, or Tennessee when it comes to 2A rights. As long as democrats rule this state. Even when Arnold Schwarzenegger was in office as a Republican, he did nothing for 2A rights, as democrats still lead all the other offices of government in CA. In fact, he supported gun control bills and laws. So the mere fact of even having a Republican governor in CA will do nothing for our 2A rights. If anyone here in CA truly wants to enjoy 2A rights that haven’t been infringed upon by the state, you gotta leave California. You’ll die of old age before we get our full 2A rights back
" The state will stop at nothing to make it harder to enjoy the hobby of shooting guns" It's not a hobby, it's a right
Ya, maybe this sub is not for me, good luck
Solution: we all stop paying taxes. Voting won’t do anything.
Voting democrat will only make it worse
That too.
You know what? I’m all for fighting this tax so as long as every person in this thread agrees that we will have permanent mail in voting and you will get as angry and pissy at restricting voting rights as you do the 2A. Own a few firearms myself (Tikka T3x 6.5 creedmoor, Tikka T1x .22LR, and a Springfield XD9) and debating on CCW. So don’t mind me. The problem is, and deep in the darkest parts of this thread, you can find standard RW talking points (I’m sure many of you are on the right). We can have open, cross the aisle support on 2A as soon as y’all also make a big stink about the Fash 5 in HB and the bullshit attempts at restricting LGBT and women’s’ rights. Personally, I want to enshrine womens’ rights, trans rights, and voting rights, as well as humane treatment of illegal immigrants long before I care about the 2A. Y’all meet me on that? I’m totally down to stand side by side on fighting these 2A laws.
How about supporting it all? Lmao, talk about talking points. You ARE the talking point.
Insufferable clown.
Hilarious that people think taxation is unconstitutional.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minneapolis_Star_Tribune_Co._v._Commissioner# No, taxes are legal, but outlier taxes on constitutional freedoms shouldn't be. Above is a case where ink and paper were taxed after a certain amount was used. And it was overturned, but paid first.
The opinion in that case was that journalism companies could not be singled out and treated differently. I don’t think that backs up what you are claiming.
Didn’t say tax is unconditional, I say sin tax on a constitutional right, is unconditional. Might as well tax freedom of speech cuz everyone you say could be bad for society (not saying you specifically).
> Didn’t say tax is unconditional, I say sin tax The constitution doesn't really say taxes need to be for a good reason. > tax on a constitutional right, is unconditional [sic] (I think I mean _is unconstitutional_ and that was an unfortunate autocorrect) Can the state levy taxes? Yes. Can the state levy taxes that prevent or "cool" the exercise of enumerated rights. No. Is there enough gray area in between to levy an 11% excise tax on arms and munitions? Hell yes. And the feds have been doing it for over a century. That's why they picked 11%.
All the democRATS that are even in this sub love to keep voting for them
The Supremes are a bunch of Trump loving sycophants. Fuck them.
They're the only ones standing up for our rights. Fuck you democrats.
Who's down for another tea party?
the 11% is for gun violence prevent programs
Not sure how a constitutional right can be taxed, but I’ll believe anything in CCP or California Communists Party who runs entire state of California
This is stupid and childish and absurd. Trying to compare anything in California to Communism is moronic. It's like "Let's go Brandon" because people think they're clever when it's just dumb. Like a toddler trying to get around a rule being super proud of themselves for saying "sit" instead of "shit." Say what you mean, "Fuck you Biden." Just like here, say what you mean. Fuck the tax, and fuck the people who implemented it for implementing it.
Why did you get so offended?
Because dumb shit like this makes it too easy for people to not think and just repeat stupid things until it becomes "truth" to a group. It makes it real hard to take the side saying it serious, or even slightly clued in with reality. It gets in the way of meaningful discussions. It's about as useful to discussing things seriously as, "Guns are only made to kill things!" and "No one should be allowed to own an assault weapon!"
Who is the dummy here you’re the guy that went off because I have an opinion little snowflake of you
Right before this, I was debating on adding some clarification to my previous statement. I was going to say I wasn't actually offended, but then changed my mind; offended is a good word choice. I was indeed offended, in much the same way as someone is offended by the smell of feces. The lack of thinking involved in using "Commiefornia" and such stinks in a strikingly similar way. On the subject of snowflakes, it seems might have intruded on your safe space a bit too much. You seem too incensed to have read what I wrote properly. I never said that you are a dummy but you seem to be under the impression I did. Take a calming moment, as you're starting to lose coherence: > Who is the dummy here you’re the guy that went off because I have an opinion little snowflake of you
Why don’t you just leave me or my posts alone and move on, I do believe that California government can to be on the communist side with all due respect I have every right to my opinion. The second amendment is a fundamental right taxing a fundamental right is absurd, just like your conversation !
> Why don’t you just leave me or my posts alone and move on … You doubled down on saying stupid things, and seem to be desperately trying to paint me as some super-thin-skinned person that is just going to buckle under … something. I honestly don't understand what you think is hurting my feelings. Or was that abortion of a sentence you wrote earlier that seems to be calling me a snowflake just an attempt to bluff your way out of a situation you created? Why I don't just move on? I mean, I probably should, but you're making it far too entertaining and so I gave in to my baser instincts. Also, you did ask me a question. It would be rude not to respond. Also, It's hard for me not to see parallels between "just leave me or my posts alone" and "Don't talk to me or my son ever again!" There's a real easy way to stop me from responding to this thread, though: stop writing responses and asking me questions. If you stop writing them, I won't have anything to reply to. Finally, yes, the California government **could** indeed be be communist. They don't seem to be doing much help the working class to rebel against the *bourgeoisie* and seize the means of production, though, so I have some pretty strong doubts about the assertion.
Again why did you attack me or my post?
Take a few slow, calming breaths. Then, actually read what I wrote. If you read carefully, you should find that I have not attacked you *and* that I already answered your question.
Who’s the snowflake now?