Conspiracy Theories
-
Here's a conspiracy for ya:
It's all about the money to run s socialist country - all the "fair" and
"we have to do something to protect the kids" and on and on and on.
It's all "we need more money" bs. That's what global warming is.
You can pollute and spew carbons out the wazoo = as long as you PAY UP.
You can own guns if you PAY UP.
You can let your cows fart, if you PAY UP.
You can get on the internet and buy stuff, if you PAY UP.
You can heat your house with wood, and have campfires while camping, if you PAY UP.
It's all about getting the money to buy more and more dependency on our gov, so the votes are there
for marxists to keep winning elections.
This is why they MUST HAVE gun registration. They can't tax what they can't find.
****************************************************************
Beware the gun tax
<h2 class="subtitle" style="border: 0px; outline: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px; font-size: 18px; font-family: 'PT Sans Narrow', sans-serif; color: rgb(51, 51, 51);"></h2>By: John Hayward | April 2nd, 2013 at 11:08 AM | 12
David Addington at the
Heritage Foundation reports on a little something-something slipped into the rough beast of gun control laws slouching toward the Senate to be born, courtesy of majority leader Harry Reid:Title I of the Reid gun control bill purports to "fix gun checks." The proposed "fix" in section 122 of S. 649 is to take away an individual's right to sell or give away a firearm to another individual unless, in most cases, the individual (1) uses a licensed importer, dealer, or manufacturer to make the transfer of the firearm and (2)pays a fee to that importer, dealer, or manufacturer to make the transfer.The individual transferring the firearm is not actually receiving a service; the federal government is receiving the service. The service the government gets is a background check on the intended recipient of the firearm, because the law requires the importer, dealer, or manufacturer to run the recipient through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.Forcing the individual to pay for the government-mandated service, which is in fact a service to the government, is in essence a federal tax on the individual. And the amount the individual pays as a fee is not limited by the legislation; section 122(a)(4) of the Reid bill enacts a new section 922(t)(4)(
(i) of title 18 of the U.S. Code togrant to Attorney General Eric Holder the power to set the maximum fee by regulation.That sounds great! I was just thinking that what this country really needs is Eric Holder controlling more of our lives.
Besides the obvious ramifications for gun control, this is a prime example of all the little back doors installed in our liberty by Big Government. Countless taxes are disguised as "fees" and "penalties." When ObamaCare reached the Supreme Court, we learned just how quickly the political class was willing to admit they're all taxes, no matter what rhetorical sleight-of-hand is used to slip them past voters. Remember when President Obama literally laughed out loud at the idea his health-care plan would impose taxes on the middle class? On Day One of that bizarre Supreme Court hearing, he stopped laughing.
No doubt Reid, Holder, and their allies would respond to Addington's criticism by insisting that it's the American people receiving this vital universal background check "service," not the federal bureaucracy. The government's interests are always camouflaged as popular interest, with bureaucrats serving as the avatars of popular will.
Once Harry Reid's background check tax is in place, it could easily become a clamp for choking off gun rights, by simply cranking the fee up high enough. At some point, this would prompt dramatically increased interest in black-market gun transfers, which would tend to defeat the entire purpose of universal background checks – which won't be much of an impediment to criminals anyway, although supporters of the idea hope it will dissuade the "straw purchasers" who buy weapons legally and funnel them to the underworld.
Placing a stiff "fee" on a background check system for even the most casual transfer of firearms would provide a monetary incentive for people to avoid using the system, measured against the risk of getting arrested for violating the law. If the background check system is truly a universal public interest, shouldn't it be financed out of general taxation and provided "free" to those who need it, just like every other socialized necessity? We hear a lot about how public subsidies are necessary to guarantee "access" to our "rights." For example, it has become received wisdom on the Left that if people are obliged to pay for their own birth control, they are being denied "access" to it. Why shouldn't that logic apply to gun rights, which really are explicitly spelled out in the Bill of Rights? If we're not going to subsidize legal gun purchases under this principle of "access," we should at least provide those universal background checks for "free."
It's hard to resolve a tax on the purchase or transfer of all firearms with the concept of a "right to keep and bear arms that shall not be infringed." Taxing the exercise of a right is a clear infringement upon it, as any discussion of poll taxes would swiftly make clear. In fact, Eric Holder's Justice Department has a habit of arguing that even minor incidental expenses incurred in the course of obtaining voter identification, such as the cost of traveling to an election office to pick up a free ID card, are unacceptable infringements upon voting rights. Attorney General Holder himself has not been shy about denouncing these expenses as a racist conspiracy to suppress the minority vote. Wouldn't Harry Reid's gun tax be a comparable conspiracy to suppress the exercise of Second Amendment rights by law-abiding minority gun buyers?
Or should we stop asking such impertinent questions, and accept the judgment of politicians and government officials about just how alienable our inalienable rights must become, on a case-by-case basis?
Tags: Eric Holder, Gun control, Harry Reid, Second Amendment, taxes, universal background check
-
I don't think Cal is a real person
-
Well, Canton Mike knows me well, us and our wives have been to dinner, etc.
Steve has met me in person.
You are all soaked in Egypt, Woody.
-
Well, Canton Mike knows me well, us and our wives have been to dinner, etc.
Steve has met me in person.
You are all soaked in Egypt, Woody.
Well, Canton Mike knows me well, us and our wives have been to dinner, etc.
Steve has met me in person.
You are all soaked in Egypt, Woody.
You must get all warm and fuzzy inside when you type one of your catch phrases
My conspiracy theory is still that you aren't a real person. Maybe just some code made by someone as a joke. Maybe you are bunch of conservative squirrels running on a keyboard. Maybe you are one monkey standing on another monkeys shoulders wearing a large trench coat
-
22% of Romney voters think Obama is the anti-Christ
WTF?
-
22% of Romney voters think Obama is the anti-Christ
WTF?
And? Lets see a real post. Besides "WTF"?
"You planning on having a long relationship with that glass or are you going to drink it? Drink up, man. Maybe we can get another.” - Janis Joplin, 1970. -
I don't think Cal is a real person
If two people on this forum believe that, what's that make the pecentage of active posters on the political forum? 10%?
Approximately 10% of the posters on this forum don't believe cal is real.
-
When I first joined the board I didn't think he was real either. I thought he was a guy fucking around, playing a character. But Cal has to be real, if only because there's no way someone could keep up his performance for that many years. Andy Kaufman couldn't even do that.
-
Frontline runs a three-hour Oswald special every year around 11/22 that I thought made a pretty convincing case that there was at least a decent chance that Oswald had a Cuban co-conspirator with him at the time of the shooting. He was seen with some in the days before the assassination.
We'll probably never know.
-
I thought the movie "JFK" by Oliver Stone gave some interesting versions of what wasnt disclosed by the Warren commision...
Is that available to the public yet?
-
Frontline runs a three-hour Oswald special every year around 11/22 that I thought made a pretty convincing case that there was at least a decent chance that Oswald had a Cuban co-conspirator with him at the time of the shooting. He was seen with some in the days before the assassination.
We'll probably never know.
Frontline runs a three-hour Oswald special every year around 11/22 that I thought made a pretty convincing case that there was at least a decent chance that Oswald had a Cuban co-conspirator with him at the time of the shooting. He was seen with some in the days before the assassination.
We'll probably never know.
I have absolutely no proof but I highly doubt that Oswald acted alone, or for that matter was even the actual shooter. We will never know the truth on that one.
-
I think we know for certain he was one of the shooters, if not the only one.
-
22% of Romney voters think Obama is the anti-Christ
WTF?
And? Lets see a real post. Besides "WTF"?
And? Lets see a real post. Besides "WTF"?
obvious troll is obvious
to think i actually need an in depth response to explain how Retarded that stat is
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login