Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: VA-ALERT: Republican Leadership killed pro-gun bills!

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Manassas, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    399

    Post imported post

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    VCDL's meeting schedule: http://www.vcdl.org/meetings.html
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

    THIS IS AN *ACTION ITEM* alert. The Action Item is at the end.

    Below is an email that Delegate Bob Marshall has sent out to his constituents about shenanigans that were pulled last year by the Speaker of the House, Delegate Bill Howell.

    Actually, VCDL has been telling you that the Speaker's fingerprints are all over the demise of many pro-gun bills over the last few years, but this is confirmation from an "insider."

    It is important for you to understand that the Speaker of the House in Virginia is the most powerful Speaker in the United States. He has immense powers, including setting up the committees, subcommittees and determining the makeup of the committees and subcommittees. He even picks the members of the committees and subcommittees from the OTHER PARTY!!

    So committees and subcommittees can be stacked however the Speaker pleases. That is true legislative power that is mind blowing.

    A few years ago, strong, but politically incorrect pro-gun bills were killed in the House by sending them to subcommittee #3 of the Militia, Police, and Public Safety Committee. We refer to subcommittee #3 as the "Death Star" subcommittee because Speaker Howell assigned 3 anti-gun Democrats and 2 pro-gun Republicans to the subcommittee. Virtually any pro-gun bill that ended up there was doomed to die by a vote of 3 to 2 against the bill - and that they did, including College Carry and others.

    The Speaker's scheme was to ensure the best pro-gun legislation died at the hands of the anti-gun Democrats in the Death Star subcommittee. (Those anti-gun Democrats should not be forgotten, either: Delegates Jim Scott, Paula Miller, and Roslyn Tyler.)

    When VCDL complained to the Republican Leadership bitterly about pro-gun bills going to the Death Star subcommittee, they stopped going there. BUT, pro-gun bills from the 2008 session simply DISAPPEARED. They were never heard in a subcommittee nor in any committee. They just dried up and blew away to parts unknown!

    Yet another reminder of the power of the Speaker. In essence he has a pocket veto. He puts the bill in his pocket and it is never heard from again. :-(

    So much for your voice being heard and pro-gun bills even getting a fair hearing.

    Many Delegates are dismayed by the "disappearing bills" phenomenon, but Delegate Marshall wasn't afraid to go against his Party to protest what he sees as an injustice.

    Here is Delegate Bob Marshall's email to his constituents (which was initiated by a constituent request for legislation on repealing the restaurant ban and allowing carry in K-12 schools by CHP holders):

    --

    I have long supported responsible gun owners to secure concealed carry permits. Back in the 1990’s I opposed the gun a month law which passed anyway, I supported a revamping of Virginia’s concealed carry law, and I opposed amendments weakening concealed carry rights.

    In 2005 I voted for HB 2535 which allows the holder of a valid concealed handgun permit to possess a concealed handgun on school property while in a motor vehicle in a parking lot, traffic circle, or other means of vehicular access or exit from the school.

    And in 2008 I voted for SB 476 which allowed concealed handgun permit holders to enter a restaurant where alcohol is served but which prohibits a person who carries a concealed handgun onto the premises of a restaurant or club from consuming an alcoholic beverage while on the premises.

    In 2008 I and Del. Gilbert introduced concealed carry bills.

    I would have voted for HB 1371 (Gilbert) which prohibits a state entity, including the board of visitors of a state institution of higher education, from prohibiting the possession of a handgun on state property by a person with a valid concealed handgun permit, unless expressly authorized by statute to adopt such a rule, regulation, or policy. This is directed primarily at sate college Boars of Visitors which have prohibited concealed carry permit holders who are students from exercising concealed carry rights on a campus.

    Additionally, I introduced HB 424 which allows full-time faculty members of state institutions of higher education who possess a valid Virginia concealed handgun permit to carry a concealed handgun on campus.

    However, Republican Speaker Bill Howell made it very clear he did not want these bills considered, and Militia and Police Chair Beverly Sherwood refused to call our bills up for a hearing. Del. Gilbert and I held a press conference at the end of the 2008 session and criticized Speaker Howell for this gag rule he imposed on our concealed carry bills.

    Republican Majority leader Morgan Griffith said the bills would have failed if they were reported to the floor. But his statement does not square with his own actions in pulling a bill from the House floor when I offered an amendment to another bill which would have allowed professors to carry on campus.

    When I was not in the House Chamber because of a previously scheduled meeting in Northern Virginia, Del. Griffith called up the bill I wanted to amend and it passed without my proposed concealed carry amendment.

    What I am saying is that I am not hopeful the Republican leadership will assist us in this matter.

    There is the additional problem that Speaker Bill Howell in 2008 pushed for and secured a House Rules change which limits all delegates to only introducing 15 bills per year. I talked to the Speaker about this at the Clemson-UVA game, Saturday, November 22. He told me no one ever asked him to introduce more than 15 bills, and that he saw no reason that any House of Delegates member should be allowed to introduce more than 15 bills. I disagreed with him, pointing out that I have more registered voters than some Virginia state Senate districts.

    I voted AGAINST this rules changed and another one which provided for secret votes in sub-committees and was punished by Speaker Howell by being denied a committee chairmanship, removed as vice chair from a committee I had been on since 1992 and was subject to other “penalties.”

    You may want to contact Speaker Howell and Del. Griffith to let them know of your concerns about the way they are handling concealed carry bills, and their support for limits on the number of bills members may introduce.

    They can be reached at: delwhowell@house.state.va.us and delmgriffith@house.state.va.us

    The state senate has no such rules limiting the number of bills senators may introduce.

    Sincerely,

    Delegate Bob Marshall

    PS Below is a news article from the Collegiate Times on the press conference Del Gilbert and I held.

    Tabled concealed carry legislation sparks debate
    by Gordon Block, CT news reporter
    Tuesday, March 4, 2008; 11:20 AM

    RICHMOND -- New legislation from two Virginia state delegates has caused controversy following recent incidents at college campuses nationwide. The legislation, HB 424 and HB 1371, introduced by delegates Robert Marshall (R-13) and Todd Gilbert (R-15), would allow faculty members to carry weapons into classrooms.

    Both HB 424 and HB 1371 were left in committee, meaning that the bills have been killed for the 2008 session. Marshall and Gilbert came together for a press conference with members of the group Students for Concealed Carry on Campus Monday morning. At the conference both legislators defended the ability for professors to carry weapons.

    "You entrust your son or daughter's with them for their future training, and they should be trusted enough so we can say 'You can do this,'" Marshall said.

    Gilbert noted the ability for citizens to protect themselves in violent situations.

    "Bad guys will carry guns no matter what," Gilbert said. "Armed citizens can stop shootings."

    Gilbert blasted the Virginia Tech Review Panels' assertion that more guns would have caused confusion during the shootings on April 16.

    "I find this to be a shameful exercise of political correctness," Gilbert said. "The statement is based on pure emotion."
    Also addressed were the fears that instructors would become targets of violence as a result of their ability to carry guns.
    "There's nothing that puts an X on their forehead," Marshall said.

    Representatives from Students for Concealed Carry on Campus also spoke out on the issue.
    "If I pay money to go to a school I should be able to protect myself," said Logan Metesh, a sophomore historic preservation major and student leader for SCCC at the University of Mary Washington.

    Other students echoed those feelings.

    "If I'm walking on campus, I can defend myself," said Lyndsay George, sophomore English major at Virginia Tech.

    Also mentioned was that those with concealed weapons permits are heavily accredited.

    "People who do carry concealed guns are responsible and certified," George said.

    Student supporters of the legislation called for those against the bill to consider the logic behind the bills.

    "Those who are against the bills should check their facts and think about it," Metesh said.

    Others asked for people to understand the issue.

    "People opposed to the legislation are doing so for emotional rather than practical means," George said.

    However, some universities, like Tech, do not agree with the newly proposed legislation.

    "We don't believe guns belong on the campus or in the classroom," said Larry Hincker, associate vice president of university relations.

    Others have questioned whether or not it would be effective.

    "You can pro and con it all day, but it's not going to solve the problem. There are too many factors to make it a clear yes or no answer," said Jasper Cooke, member of the board of directors for the International Association of Campus Law Enforcement administrators.

    The current session of the Virginia General Assembly adjourns Saturday, March 8, and will reconvene for an additional session April 16.

    --

    ACTION ITEM:

    Let's all contact Speaker Howell and urge him to help us get all pro-gun bills a fair vote - no more Death Star subcommittees, no more bills disappearing into thin air.

    If you're a constituent of Speaker Howell, be sure to mention that fact. He needs to hear that voting gun owners in his district are upset about the underhanded way he's killed pro-gun legislation.

    *** BE POLITE, but FIRM ***

    Delegate Howell's email address:

    DelBHowell@house.state.va.us

    Suggested title: Give pro-gun bills a fair chance!

    Suggested message:

    Dear Mr. Speaker,

    Unlike recent years where the most important pro-gun bills either went to a committee controlled by anti-gun Democrats or the bills just disappeared into thin air, I urge you to use your powers to see that all pro-gun bills get a full and fair hearing in the House.

    Please let me know what you are going to do.

    Sincerely,
    [YOUR NAME]
    [YOUR ADDRESS]




    -------------------------------------------
    ************************************************** *************************
    VA-ALERT is a project of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc.
    (VCDL). VCDL is an all-volunteer, non-partisan grassroots organization
    dedicated to defending the human rights of all Virginians. The Right to
    Keep and Bear Arms is a fundamental human right.

    VCDL web page: http://www.vcdl.org
    ************************************************** *************************

  2. #2
    Regular Member 2a4all's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Newport News, VA, ,
    Posts
    1,586

    Post imported post

    An additional argument to get Speaker Howell's support could be made using the tax revenue from Virginia firearms sales. This one of the few retail areas with increasing sales. Sales (and the related tax revenues) are down in most other categories, exsaserbating the current tight fiscal situation.

    Does anyone have any figures regarding the dollar volume of firearm sales in Virginia?
    A law-abiding citizen should be able to carry his personal protection firearm anywhere that an armed criminal might go.

    Member VCDL, NRA

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member Hawkflyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,315

    Post imported post

    2a4all wrote:
    An additional argument to get Speaker Howell's support could be made using the tax revenue from Virginia firearms sales. This one of the few retail areas with increasing sales. Sales (and the related tax revenues) are down in most other categories, exsaserbating the current tight fiscal situation.

    Does anyone have any figures regarding the dollar volume of firearm sales in Virginia?
    While I understand your point, I am not so certain it is a good idea to point out the tax revenues related to gun sales to this legislature. I can assure up that a bill raising the tax on firearms related sales would not get a death star or pocket veto treatment.



    Regards
    "Research has shown that a 230 grain lead pellet placed just behind the ear at 850 FPS results in a permanent cure for violent criminal behavior."
    "If you are not getting Flak, you are not over the target"
    "186,000 Miles per second! ... Not just a good idea ... It's the law!"

  4. #4
    Regular Member 2a4all's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Newport News, VA, ,
    Posts
    1,586

    Post imported post

    Hawkflyer wrote:
    2a4all wrote:
    An additional argument to get Speaker Howell's support could be made using the tax revenue from Virginia firearms sales. This one of the few retail areas with increasing sales. Sales (and the related tax revenues) are down in most other categories, exsaserbating the current tight fiscal situation.

    Does anyone have any figures regarding the dollar volume of firearm sales in Virginia?
    While I understand your point, I am not so certain it is a good idea to point out the tax revenues related to gun sales to this legislature. I can assure up that a bill raising the tax on firearms related sales would not get a death star or pocket veto treatment.



    Regards
    This isn't about raising taxes, but about impacting the (sales) tax revenues generated by firearms related sales as a result of legislative (in)actions which would curb or restrict such sales (or the activities that drive them). Making it easier to own/carry/use firearms might encourage sales, hence increase the related sales tax revenues.

    Virginians are gun owners, they like to use their firearms, and willingly spend the money to do so. The legislature needs to know that they can encourage (needed) revenue here.
    A law-abiding citizen should be able to carry his personal protection firearm anywhere that an armed criminal might go.

    Member VCDL, NRA

  5. #5
    Founder's Club Member Hawkflyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,315

    Post imported post

    2a4all wrote:
    Hawkflyer wrote:
    2a4all wrote:
    An additional argument to get Speaker Howell's support could be made using the tax revenue from Virginia firearms sales. This one of the few retail areas with increasing sales. Sales (and the related tax revenues) are down in most other categories, exsaserbating the current tight fiscal situation.

    Does anyone have any figures regarding the dollar volume of firearm sales in Virginia?
    While I understand your point, I am not so certain it is a good idea to point out the tax revenues related to gun sales to this legislature. I can assure up that a bill raising the tax on firearms related sales would not get a death star or pocket veto treatment.



    Regards
    This isn't about raising taxes, but about impacting the (sales) tax revenues generated by firearms related sales as a result of legislative (in)actions which would curb or restrict such sales (or the activities that drive them). Making it easier to own/carry/use firearms might encourage sales, hence increase the related sales tax revenues.

    Virginians are gun owners, they like to use their firearms, and willingly spend the money to do so. The legislature needs to know that they can encourage (needed) revenue here.
    We do not all have your apparently limitless supply of cash and/or your willingness to give it to the Commonwealth. I say again it is not smart to point at firearms related tax revenues with a tax and spend legislature that is anti gun and seeking revenue from a source that cannot fight back. While they might not place high enough taxes on firearms to curb your buying interest, not all of us feel that way.
    "Research has shown that a 230 grain lead pellet placed just behind the ear at 850 FPS results in a permanent cure for violent criminal behavior."
    "If you are not getting Flak, you are not over the target"
    "186,000 Miles per second! ... Not just a good idea ... It's the law!"

  6. #6
    Regular Member 2a4all's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Newport News, VA, ,
    Posts
    1,586

    Post imported post

    Hawkflyer wrote:
    2a4all wrote:
    Hawkflyer wrote:
    2a4all wrote:
    An additional argument to get Speaker Howell's support could be made using the tax revenue from Virginia firearms sales. This one of the few retail areas with increasing sales. Sales (and the related tax revenues) are down in most other categories, exsaserbating the current tight fiscal situation.

    Does anyone have any figures regarding the dollar volume of firearm sales in Virginia?
    While I understand your point, I am not so certain it is a good idea to point out the tax revenues related to gun sales to this legislature. I can assure up that a bill raising the tax on firearms related sales would not get a death star or pocket veto treatment.



    Regards
    This isn't about raising taxes, but about impacting the (sales) tax revenues generated by firearms related sales as a result of legislative (in)actions which would curb or restrict such sales (or the activities that drive them). Making it easier to own/carry/use firearms might encourage sales, hence increase the related sales tax revenues.

    Virginians are gun owners, they like to use their firearms, and willingly spend the money to do so. The legislature needs to know that they can encourage (needed) revenue here.
    We do not all have your apparently limitless supply of cash and/or your willingness to give it to the Commonwealth. I say again it is not smart to point at firearms related tax revenues with a tax and spend legislature that is anti gun and seeking revenue from a source that cannot fight back. While they might not place high enough taxes on firearms to curb your buying interest, not all of us feel that way.
    Trust me. My funds are very limited.

    You apparently think that talking to the legislature about the sales tax revenue raised from Virginians (and visitors) in pursuit of an activity that they enjoy will somehow encourage some kind of surtax to be levied? Oops.

    I'm talking about money that is already being spent, or that might be spent, including clothing, camping supplies (by hunters), gasoline, ammo, firearms & accessories (bags, rests, cleaning supplies, optics, etc). This is likely a considerable sum statewide, and is spent willingly. 5% of this considerable sum (the sales tax) flows into the commonwealth's coffers and is one of the few taxes that individuals don't seek to avoid (a plus from the collections standpoint).

    What needs to be done here is to remind Speaker Howell that firearm related recreation is big business and friendly legislation is a good thing for the Commonwealth. Some legislators are gun owners too.

    Can't fight back? You pay these taxes for that right, and your vote is how you do it.


    A law-abiding citizen should be able to carry his personal protection firearm anywhere that an armed criminal might go.

    Member VCDL, NRA

  7. #7
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,964

    Post imported post

    What an abuse of power. I will be sure to search out the SOB on Lobby Day.

    Limiting the number of bills, rigging committees, secret sub-committee voting and "disappearing" legislation. Is this Virginia, or is this Venezuela? What we really need, though is an Anti-Howell Amendment to the Commonwealth Constitution!!!
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitableand let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come . PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  8. #8
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    It is my understanding that the limit on bill submission applies only to years that the legislature is in short session. It may still not be a good idea, but that does give it at least some benefit of a doubt that there is some ulterior motive.

    TFred


  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member Hawkflyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,315

    Post imported post

    2a4all wrote:
    ...SNIP
    Trust me. My funds are very limited.

    You apparently think that talking to the legislature about the sales tax revenue raised from Virginians (and visitors) in pursuit of an activity that they enjoy will somehow encourage some kind of surtax to be levied? Oops.

    I'm talking about money that is already being spent, or that might be spent, including clothing, camping supplies (by hunters), gasoline, ammo, firearms & accessories (bags, rests, cleaning supplies, optics, etc). This is likely a considerable sum statewide, and is spent willingly. 5% of this considerable sum (the sales tax) flows into the commonwealth's coffers and is one of the few taxes that individuals don't seek to avoid (a plus from the collections standpoint).

    What needs to be done here is to remind Speaker Howell that firearm related recreation is big business and friendly legislation is a good thing for the Commonwealth. Some legislators are gun owners too.

    Can't fight back? You pay these taxes for that right, and your vote is how you do it.

    As I said in my original post, I understand completely what you are talking about and suggesting. I just diagree with your approach. It is clear that you have never had to deal with our legislature in person or you would know that they are always looking for places to raise the taxes. They use taxes as a social motivator. Show them somplace that people are willing to pay a tax, coupled with a place the legislature would like to apply new restrictive laws but can't because it would not be popular, and I will show you a place ripe for large tax increases.


    I do not know where you were brought up, but where I come from I don't pay taxes for "rights", and while voting can change the political landscape, a lot of damage can be done between election cycles. It is far better to prevent new unfrendly legislation than to try to fix it after it is already in place.

    Regards
    "Research has shown that a 230 grain lead pellet placed just behind the ear at 850 FPS results in a permanent cure for violent criminal behavior."
    "If you are not getting Flak, you are not over the target"
    "186,000 Miles per second! ... Not just a good idea ... It's the law!"

  10. #10
    Regular Member 2a4all's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Newport News, VA, ,
    Posts
    1,586

    Post imported post

    Hawkflyer wrote:
    2a4all wrote:
    ...SNIP
    Trust me. My funds are very limited.

    You apparently think that talking to the legislature about the sales tax revenue raised from Virginians (and visitors) in pursuit of an activity that they enjoy will somehow encourage some kind of surtax to be levied? Oops.

    I'm talking about money that is already being spent, or that might be spent, including clothing, camping supplies (by hunters), gasoline, ammo, firearms & accessories (bags, rests, cleaning supplies, optics, etc). This is likely a considerable sum statewide, and is spent willingly. 5% of this considerable sum (the sales tax) flows into the commonwealth's coffers and is one of the few taxes that individuals don't seek to avoid (a plus from the collections standpoint).

    What needs to be done here is to remind Speaker Howell that firearm related recreation is big business and friendly legislation is a good thing for the Commonwealth. Some legislators are gun owners too.

    Can't fight back? You pay these taxes for that right, and your vote is how you do it.

    As I said in my original post, I understand completely what you are talking about and suggesting. I just diagree with your approach. It is clear that you have never had to deal with our legislature in person or you would know that they are always looking for places to raise the taxes. They use taxes as a social motivator. Show them somplace that people are willing to pay a tax, coupled with a place the legislature would like to apply new restrictive laws but can't because it would not be popular, and I will show you a place ripe for large tax increases.


    I do not know where you were brought up, but where I come from I don't pay taxes for "rights", and while voting can change the political landscape, a lot of damage can be done between election cycles. It is far better to prevent new unfrendly legislation than to try to fix it after it is already in place.

    Regards
    Hmm.

    Let us not speak to the King of pleasures, for He may tax them. Let us not speak to the King of taxes we pay, for He may increase them.

    Let us instead confront the King en mass bearing the object of our pleasure, and demand that He cease His oppressive measures against the free exercise of our rights to enjoy these pleasures.

    Once upon a time, a war was fought because of this. We thus established our form of self-government through elected officials so that when they don't represent our desires, we can replace them.

    I can't imagine the very large number of gun owners in Virginia absorbing any new firearms related taxes. But I can envision such a move as a real attention getter, which might result in a more gun-friendly parliament (er House of Delegates). Speaker Howell isn't naieve.

    BTW, taxpayers pay the bills so even the non-taxpayers can exercise their rights.
    A law-abiding citizen should be able to carry his personal protection firearm anywhere that an armed criminal might go.

    Member VCDL, NRA

  11. #11
    Founder's Club Member Hawkflyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,315

    Post imported post

    2a4all wrote:
    ...SNIP
    Hmm.

    Let us not speak to the King of pleasures, for He may tax them. Let us not speak to the King of taxes we pay, for He may increase them.

    Let us instead confront the King en mass bearing the object of our pleasure, and demand that He cease His oppressive measures against the free exercise of our rights to enjoy these pleasures.

    Once upon a time, a war was fought because of this. We thus established our form of self-government through elected officials so that when they don't represent our desires, we can replace them.

    I can't imagine the very large number of gun owners in Virginia absorbing any new firearms related taxes. But I can envision such a move as a real attention getter, which might result in a more gun-friendly parliament (er House of Delegates). Speaker Howell isn't naieve.

    BTW, taxpayers pay the bills so even the non-taxpayers can exercise their rights.
    Apparently you still have not grasp what I am saying or simply refuse to address the discussion directly, I think we shall have to agree to disagree.

    There is a big difference between advocating approaches that do not encourage higher taxes (my position), and presenting arguments to the legislature that youhave no problem with the current taxes you pay and in fact are willing to pay even more to exercise your RIGHT to own firearms (your position).

    We are not talking about sales taxes here, we are talking about all of the other forms of taxes that have been and can be applied to firearms and related equipment. For instance, are you willing to pay say $100 per bullet (not cartridge, but bullet) to defray the costs of depositing toxic heavy metals in the environment? While you might be willing to pay an additional $2,500 for a box of 25 pistol cartridges, or the bullets to make them, I am not. Of course by your theory this would add a lot of money to the state coffers from all those out of state sales as people rush here from the surrounding states where a box of ammo would still be $25 bucks.

    Of course that would not last long as surrounding states would soon raise their taxes as well. After all it is not unconstitutional, just abusive. Perhaps we could then lower or even eliminate the tax on actual firearms. In fact we could even repeal ALL the gun laws and simply replace them with taxes on other stuff that are so high that no one will be able to actually shoot a firearm.

    Perhaps a content tax on firearms components. Who could complain about that. We could tax the metal and petrol based plastics used to make firearms. Perhaps a $5,000 dollar petrol plastic tax on the material used to make Glocks! Yea thats the ticket, we make Glocks cost $6,000 and up each, ammo would be about $100-200 per round and you can have all the guns you want. What a boon to the state treasury that would be.

    Thank you very much for your help, but please, if you are planning to make an argument to Richmond that we are happily paying the existing taxes and we might even be willing to pay more, just stay home. You could do more damage than good. The legislature is not stupid enough to buy that argument any more than thinking citizens are. The sales tax is not the only thing on the table in the discussion. While you may be willing to pay whatever YOUR king wants to charge you for YOUR rights, I have no king and I am not willing to pay more for my RIGHTS. MY rights were already paid for with theblood of this nations soldiers past and present.
    "Research has shown that a 230 grain lead pellet placed just behind the ear at 850 FPS results in a permanent cure for violent criminal behavior."
    "If you are not getting Flak, you are not over the target"
    "186,000 Miles per second! ... Not just a good idea ... It's the law!"

  12. #12
    Regular Member 2a4all's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Newport News, VA, ,
    Posts
    1,586

    Post imported post

    Hawkflyer wrote:
    2a4all wrote:
    ...SNIP
    Hmm.

    Let us not speak to the King of pleasures, for He may tax them. Let us not speak to the King of taxes we pay, for He may increase them.

    Let us instead confront the King en mass bearing the object of our pleasure, and demand that He cease His oppressive measures against the free exercise of our rights to enjoy these pleasures.

    Once upon a time, a war was fought because of this. We thus established our form of self-government through elected officials so that when they don't represent our desires, we can replace them.

    I can't imagine the very large number of gun owners in Virginia absorbing any new firearms related taxes. But I can envision such a move as a real attention getter, which might result in a more gun-friendly parliament (er House of Delegates). Speaker Howell isn't naieve.

    BTW, taxpayers pay the bills so even the non-taxpayers can exercise their rights.
    Apparently you still have not grasp what I am saying or simply refuse to address the discussion directly, I think we shall have to agree to disagree.

    There is a big difference between advocating approaches that do not encourage higher taxes (my position), and presenting arguments to the legislature that youhave no problem with the current taxes you pay and in fact are willing to pay even more to exercise your RIGHT to own firearms (your position).

    We are not talking about sales taxes here, we are talking about all of the other forms of taxes that have been and can be applied to firearms and related equipment. For instance, are you willing to pay say $100 per bullet (not cartridge, but bullet) to defray the costs of depositing toxic heavy metals in the environment? While you might be willing to pay an additional $2,500 for a box of 25 pistol cartridges, or the bullets to make them, I am not. Of course by your theory this would add a lot of money to the state coffers from all those out of state sales as people rush here from the surrounding states where a box of ammo would still be $25 bucks.

    Of course that would not last long as surrounding states would soon raise their taxes as well. After all it is not unconstitutional, just abusive. Perhaps we could then lower or even eliminate the tax on actual firearms. In fact we could even repeal ALL the gun laws and simply replace them with taxes on other stuff that are so high that no one will be able to actually shoot a firearm.

    Perhaps a content tax on firearms components. Who could complain about that. We could tax the metal and petrol based plastics used to make firearms. Perhaps a $5,000 dollar petrol plastic tax on the material used to make Glocks! Yea thats the ticket, we make Glocks cost $6,000 and up each, ammo would be about $100-200 per round and you can have all the guns you want. What a boon to the state treasury that would be.

    Thank you very much for your help, but please, if you are planning to make an argument to Richmond that we are happily paying the existing taxes and we might even be willing to pay more, just stay home. You could do more damage than good. The legislature is not stupid enough to buy that argument any more than thinking citizens are. The sales tax is not the only thing on the table in the discussion. While you may be willing to pay whatever YOUR king wants to charge you for YOUR rights, I have no king and I am not willing to pay more for my RIGHTS. MY rights were already paid for with theblood of this nations soldiers past and present.
    We are exactly talking about sales taxes. I thought I made that clear in my original post (I said "using the tax revenue", meaning existing taxes). We are not talking about new taxes, which I oppose.

    I am talking about the effect of unfriendly vs friendly gun laws on the relevant sales tax revenue. Unfriendly gun laws discourage gun users, who might spend less on their hobby here, or go to another state, resulting in less sales tax revenue. Legislators need to raise revenue without raising taxes. Friendly gun laws might help in that effort. Friendly gun laws AND oppressive taxes would definitely not work here.

    You seem to be afraid that discussing this issue with the powers that be (the King) will lead to the imposition of new taxes. Your unwillingness to do so sure made you sound like you didn't want to give the King any new ideas. What politician (in Virginia) is that stupid?

    Want a mob in Richmond on Lobby Day? Let the word get out that the GA is considering "new" firearms taxes.

    A law-abiding citizen should be able to carry his personal protection firearm anywhere that an armed criminal might go.

    Member VCDL, NRA

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •