As Predicted: Tax Guns,Sales Down, Shootings Up

Sometimes you almost hate to be right. Over the years,I have pointed out many times that anything that results in depressed gun sales will also result in increased numbers of violent crime. Yes, free access to firearms is the right to be crime free.

Hot Air’s Jazz Shaw confirms my prediction that gun buyers would take a short drive, and the number of victims wouild rise as the criminals e would believe victims would be less ab le to resist.

For 2016, Seattle showed 16 homicides in the first half, compared to 9 in the first half of 2015, largely because of the gun controls initiative Bloomberg’s B anners are pushing, to a gun tax, and it would not take that much to turn Seattle into Chicago WEst.

Here’s what the latest full graphic on the Evergreen State’s homicide/murder rate?

Every time some pol gets a “wild hair,” consisting now is it did in Pepys time, of an envelope he dare not open in public, from a gun ban group, Washington’s homicide rate spikes.

I would think that someday they would learn, but I have noever found more than lip service reform.


By the way, have you noticed the centrist websies are beginning to look as spiffy as the Progressives.


About Stranger

Extranos Alley is a Collaborate effort to provide up to information on the relationship between restrictive gun laws and violent crime; as well as other related topics. While emphasis is on United States gun laws and crime, we also provide data on crime trends world wide.
This entry was posted in GUN CONTROL FAILURES. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to As Predicted: Tax Guns,Sales Down, Shootings Up

  1. 2aguy says:

    Just today I was given this in another website from a someone who goes by the handle Kokomojojo….it is the Supreme Court decision that needs to be enforced… states that you cannot tax a right… it
    Murdoch v. Pennsylvania


    4. A State may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution. P. 319 U. S. 113.

    5. The flat license tax here involved restrains in advance the Constitutional liberties of press and religion, and inevitably tends to suppress their exercise. P. 319 U. S. 114.

    6. That the ordinance is “nondiscriminatory,” in that it applies also to peddlers of wares and merchandise, is immaterial. The liberties guaranteed by the First Amendment are in a preferred position. P. 319 U. S. 115.

    7. Since the privilege in question is guaranteed by the Federal Constitution, and exists independently of state authority, the inquiry as to whether the State has given something for which it can ask a return is irrelevant. P. 319 U. S. 115.

    8. A community may not suppress, or the State tax, the dissemination of views because they are unpopular, annoying, or distasteful. P. 319 U. S. 116.


    Page 319 U. S. 108

    The First Amendment, which the Fourteenth makes applicable to the states, declares that

    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press . . .”

    It could hardly be denied that a tax laid specifically on the exercise of those freedoms would be unconstitutional. Yet the license tax imposed by this ordinance is, in substance, just that.

  2. Stranger says:

    That was back when newspapers were American too. An editorial in the Philadelphia Inquirer commented that if you could tax a right, the tax was a privelege tax and the right became a privelege, to be taxed like any other.

    One of these days someone will challenge the absurd renewal fee, and we will get a Supreme Court ruling on fees for Permits to Purchase, and Licenses to Carry.

    As the song says, ‘Waitin’ on the day.”


Comments are closed.