Thank you ever so much SCOTUS! ::outrage::
LINK (http://pjmedia.com/blog/obamacare%E2%80%99s-threat-to-the-second-amendment/?singlepage=true)
The Supreme Court has ruled that the government can force you to buy a product as long as it’s called a “tax,” forging a new sword aimed directly at the heart of the Second Amendment.
It isn’t necessary to confiscate your guns to disarm you. All they have to do is make it too expensive. Throughout history, serfs have shared common traits: They barely have enough wherewithal to survive, they don’t own property, and they can’t defend themselves. How they reach this condition is irrelevant.
Today, it’s constitutional to force buying choices on the American people and call enforcement a “tax,” especially if it’s in the name of social justice; like Obamacare, which allegedly provides for historically “under-served ” groups like women, the uninsured, and poor immigrants.
This is the precedent big-government, tax-and-spend proponents have been laboring decades for: It’s okay to tax America to redress perceived social costs and injustice. What about a “gun tax” to pay for alleged social costs of “gun violence”? Gun banners have often complained how guns produce a public health cost, so when will we see proposals for a “gun tax” to counter this “social injustice”? Maybe $200 per gun purchase, so that poor people living in crime-ridden inner cities can no longer afford to defend their families?
::outrage:: ::gaah:: ::outrage:: ::gaah:: ::outrage:: ::gaah:: ::outrage::
I can see such a 'gun tax' to be an annual thing - per gun. It would serve a dual purpose. Not only taxing guns out of the hands of citizens because of the added expense, but also to indirectly manifest a list of gun owners, kept by the IRS. You know, so that the state knows who owns firearms, how many they own and where they live.