Democrats propose tax hike on guns, ammo weeks before midterm elections

[ADK Native]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/democrats-propose-tax-hike-on-guns-ammo-weeks-before-midterm-elections/ar-AA12gc5K?ocid=SL5GDHP&pc=SL5G&cvid=4655e220f91f427b974787894f370930

Another brilliant idea like the SAFE Act and Conceal Carry Improvement that does not help reduce or eliminate “PEOPLE VIOLENCE”.

The article states “Nearly two dozen House Democrats are proposing higher taxes on firearms and ammunition and want to link some firearm-related taxes to inflation, just weeks before the midterm elections.”

These Democrats “want to link some firearm-related taxes to inflation”?   So gun owners have to help pay for all the wasteful government spending like student loan credit, living expenses for illegal aliens, welfare cheaters and all the other unnecessary social programs?

These gun control laws only harass, intimidate and threaten law abiding firearm owners.  Truly amazing how so many are fooled by their anti-gun ignorance.

[Five Seasons]

Little do many know that there is already an excise tax on guns, ammo and hunting equipment. The pitman robertson act funds millions in conservation every year. BTW, there is no backpack tax for the hikers and bikers that use these same public resources.

btw, guess who asked for the tax? GUN OWNERS. they literally lobbied for the tax to protect our hunting privilege's after market hunting nearly wiped it all out. 

[Dinsdale]

1 hour ago, Belo said:

Little do many know that there is already an excise tax on guns, ammo and hunting equipment. The pitman robertson act funds millions in conservation every year. BTW, there is no backpack tax for the hikers and bikers that use these same public resources.

btw, guess who asked for the tax? GUN OWNERS. they literally lobbied for the tax to protect our hunting privilege's after market hunting nearly wiped it all out. 

That’s not an entirely accurate.

The “environmental protection fund” pays for all the big public NY State purchases from say Open space institute. OSI often acts as initial purchaser to clean up lawsuits/taxes/deed claims/etc before selling to state. EPF is funded by real estate transactions for the most part. Those tend to be where the hikers are interested. 

Smaller buys adding onto WMA or MUA sometimes come out of Pittman Robertson funds. I have a popular hunting season MUA by me within walking distance; easy access, stocked birds, occasional deer. In 34 years of walking that land I have never once seen another hiker off season(800 acres)

NY doesn’t even use all the P-R funds that are available. They have certain guidelines and NY never has enough projects that fit the allocated funds…..ever see a target range on NY state land? But other states build ranges with the funds, really nice ones too! One year recent it was like 15 mil out of 25 mil. combined with Dingell-Johnson fishing fund thats the same tax on anglers.IIRC (i’d have to find the article) P-R funds are used for safety and hunter ed draws out of it, hence ranges are also part of the safety end as my example.

The dynamic is changing; now DEC has started limited access to spots and an associated fee( Peekamoose in Catskills) and they re going to do more in the High Peaks (already restricting vehicle numbers in places) The Whites in NH charge a fee, that would be a good pattern.

This can be a careful what you wish for scenario for hunters that always think the paltry license fees DEC collects from hunting and fishing means anything. Its roughly 43 million and DEC budget is 6 BILLION a year. If you charge a fee, other outdoor groups are going to want a bigger say, because now you’ve given them a stake and place at the table. 

 

Edited September 26, 2022 by Dinsdale

[Larry]

This is why there's going to be a reconning in November there fuzzy little heads are going to explode 

[Grouse]

9 hours ago, Belo said:

Little do many know that there is already an excise tax on guns, ammo and hunting equipment. The pitman robertson act funds millions in conservation every year. BTW, there is no backpack tax for the hikers and bikers that use these same public resources.

btw, guess who asked for the tax? GUN OWNERS. they literally lobbied for the tax to protect our hunting privilege's after market hunting nearly wiped it all out. 

But that tax is dedicated to wildlife conservation.

The taxes being proposed by Democrats today are not!

Edited September 27, 2022 by Grouse

[phantom]

14 hours ago, Belo said:

Little do many know that there is already an excise tax on guns, ammo and hunting equipment. The pitman robertson act funds millions in conservation every year. BTW, there is no backpack tax for the hikers and bikers that use these same public resources.

btw, guess who asked for the tax? GUN OWNERS. they literally lobbied for the tax to protect our hunting privilege's after market hunting nearly wiped it all out. 

They should just make the gun tax go to the dmc  thats the only way to stop them from bothering gun owners lets face it .  Dems  harass everything and anything except for things that they make money off of notice they let the teachers union do as they please . 

[Grouse]

Since they plan to use the proposed taxes to strip us all of our 2nd Amendment rights, it might just as well go to the DNC.

 

[Five Seasons]

14 hours ago, Dinsdale said:

That’s not an entirely accurate.

The “environmental protection fund” pays for all the big public NY State purchases from say Open space institute. OSI often acts as initial purchaser to clean up lawsuits/taxes/deed claims/etc before selling to state. EPF is funded by real estate transactions for the most part. Those tend to be where the hikers are interested. 

Smaller buys adding onto WMA or MUA sometimes come out of Pittman Robertson funds. I have a popular hunting season MUA by me within walking distance; easy access, stocked birds, occasional deer. In 34 years of walking that land I have never once seen another hiker off season(800 acres)

NY doesn’t even use all the P-R funds that are available. They have certain guidelines and NY never has enough projects that fit the allocated funds…..ever see a target range on NY state land? But other states build ranges with the funds, really nice ones too! One year recent it was like 15 mil out of 25 mil. combined with Dingell-Johnson fishing fund thats the same tax on anglers.IIRC (i’d have to find the article) P-R funds are used for safety and hunter ed draws out of it, hence ranges are also part of the safety end as my example.

The dynamic is changing; now DEC has started limited access to spots and an associated fee( Peekamoose in Catskills) and they re going to do more in the High Peaks (already restricting vehicle numbers in places) The Whites in NH charge a fee, that would be a good pattern.

This can be a careful what you wish for scenario for hunters that always think the paltry license fees DEC collects from hunting and fishing means anything. Its roughly 43 million and DEC budget is 6 BILLION a year. If you charge a fee, other outdoor groups are going to want a bigger say, because now you’ve given them a stake and place at the table. 

 

I don't think you and I are disagree or did I say anything correct, you just added a little more color to it. But yes, in order to use PR money, the state has to match it. If it doesn't, then they lose the funds and yes those funds can go to public parks like baseball fields as well. 

I'm not saying it's a perfect system, but many hunters and for sure the public don't even realize the millions that go into conservation projects solely from the sale of guns and ammo. Hunters don't even really put that much in if we're honest, it's the target shooters that do.

https://wildlifeforall.us/resources/pittman-robertson-wildlife-restoration-act-explained/ (one of the better links I could find) surprised an official site wasn't on the main google search page. 

[Five Seasons]

7 hours ago, Grouse said:

But that tax is dedicated to wildlife conservation.

The taxes being proposed by Democrats today are not!

I understand, just pointing out that there is already a tax that is generally "democrat friendly"