Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Ashland guy things guns should be taxed

  1. #1
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Scappoose, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    394

    Post imported post

    http://www.dailytidings.com/2008/121...guestdixon.php

    December 19, 2008
    A gun tax would reduce the number of firearms and deaths
    By Scott Dixon
    Guest opinion
    In response to James Farmer's guest commentary, "Banning guns doesn't make you safer" (see Dec. 17 Tidings), I would like to make the following points:

    First: Most of what James Farmer wrote was published thoughout the United States many times over the last several years. A Google search for "Firearms Refresher Course" yielded more than 5,000 matches. I've seen references as far back as 2004. Is James Farmer the original author or did he just plagiarize the works of others? As a reader, I am more interested in the original thoughts of authors than in reading letters that have been cut and pasted from other sources.

    Second: One reason that so many people are opposed to gun ownership is that guns are, by their very nature and design, very efficient at killing people. While it's possible to kill people using knives and clubs, guns are quicker, easier and more certain. The act of stabbing or hitting another human being can cause the attacker to pause, curtail or lessen his actions. Pulling a trigger is too easy, too quick and too final.

    Third: While acknowledging the constitutional right to bear arms, I feel that there may be an economic method to persuade gun owners to part with their guns. Governments sometimes require citizens to collectively bear the costs incurred by a few. Society could say, "Fine, you can have your guns. However, we know that the private ownership of guns causes huge economic losses for our society. We want the owners of guns to collectively pay for those losses." I believe that if the owner of each gun had to pay the pro-rated share of the violence done by all guns, he would be inclined to dispose of the gun quickly.

    The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms estimates that there were 233 million guns in the United States in 1995. In an actuarial study done a few years ago, Jean Lemaire (a professor of insurance and actuarial science at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania) put the cost of gun violence in the United States at more than $100 billion a year. This equates to more than $400 per gun per year.

    If the average gun owner had to pay a $400 tax each year for each gun, it's likely that the gun owner would decide to dispose of some or all of his guns. With fewer guns in existence, the cost of the gun tax would increase the following year. Eventually, an equilibrium would occur where our country would have far fewer guns and far fewer deaths.

    Opponents will likely argue that criminals obviously won't pay their gun taxes. In that case, like Al Capone, they can be found guilty of tax evasion and jailed on that much-easier-to-prove charge.

    Fourth: Ironically, a gun owner's family is the most likely beneficiary of a gun owner disposing of his guns. According to Kellerman AL, Rivara FP, Somes G, et al, "Suicide in the Home in Relation to Gun Ownership" in the 1992 Vol. 327 No. 7 New England Journal of Medicine, "A gun in the home increases the risk of homicide of a household member by three times and the risk of suicide by five times compared to homes where no gun is present." How does the gun owner balance his love of guns with his love for his family?

    Scott Dixon is a retired engineer who lives in Ashland.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Rugerdoug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Wilsonville, Oregon, ,
    Posts
    3

    Post imported post

    That sounds like Ashland. I use to live in Medford before I moved up to Portland Metro. Ashland is the liberal part of Jackson County.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Window_Seat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Vacaville, California, USA
    Posts
    123

    Post imported post

    We want the owners of guns to collectively pay for those losses." I believe that if the owner of each gun had to pay the pro-rated share of the violence done by all guns, he would be inclined to dispose of the gun quickly.
    It's typical for the anti 2A loonies to want to punish the law abiding gun owners for the criminals actions, after all, they only do so because the LAGOs are more easily accessible to the A2A loonies, especially when County Sheriffs willingly release names & personal residence addresses of protected individuals to the criminals.

    Erik.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    32

    Post imported post

    There seem to be some holes in the concept.

    No payment of tax on non-criminal guns will thwart any criminal from obtaining a gun, so far as I can tell. What side is this Ashland person working for?? Certainly, he's working against upstanding, law-abiding citizens.

    A few simple questions come to mind:
    • If the tax man knows where all criminals' guns are, then why is that knowledge being withheld from law enforcement?
    • If law enforcement knows where all criminals and criminals' guns are, why not simply take them all (guns and criminals) and deal with them?

    Reality is, they cannot be taxed if they aren't known to exist. Taxing me, you and millions of others sn't going to stop the criminal down the street from obtaining another, unknown, untaxed weapon anytime he wishes to do so.

  5. #5
    State Researcher Bill Starks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nortonville, KY, USA
    Posts
    4,291

    Post imported post

    Too bad I lost all my guns in a tragic boating accident in 300 feet of water off the coast.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Sarasota, fl
    Posts
    81

    Post imported post

    maybe we should tax all of the amendments? they would make a killing, that and make every body get permits to use their rights

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Junction City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    29

    Post imported post

    Good point how much is that free speech article going to cost that guy...

Posting Permissions

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