Governor Newsom just signed nearly two dozen gun control bills into law that among other things, imposes an 11% tax on ammunition, microstamping of all semi-auto pistols and greatly expanding the locations where guns are prohibited.
“See you in court” … The California Rifle and Pistol Association
Some of those laws will and should clearly fall.
On the other hand, the tax will likely survive as will the microstamping requirement.
You could make a point that a high enough tax could amount to a de facto prohibition, but the taxes, while steep, aren’t likely to trigger that bar.
In California, you now have to pay extra taxes in order to practice your G-d given right to self-defense.
Interesting point about taxes. Is a sales tax considered an infringement on the 2A? And if it is what percentage is too high?
Hard question to answer precisely.
T/he Federal Courts have tended to refrain from striking down State taxes, unless, as in McCulloch v Maryland it worked as a tax on the Federal Government or if the tax tended to obstruct interstate commerce.
Otherwise, Federal Courts have shown great deference to States on tax matters.
I think if the tax went above 15% to 20% percent, the Federal Courts might rule it to be a deliberate infringement of the Second Amendment, rather than a legitimate tax, but again, looks to be a LOT of subjective wiggle room here.
Thanks that makes sense.
I would expand slightly that in McCulloch, Chief Justice Marshal opined that “the power to tax involves the power to destroy.”
Likely why California stopped at 11%. They know that if they tried any higher, they risk the statute being struck down as an infringement.
11% will likely qualify as a legitimate exercise of the revenue (tax) power. Higher than that would likely be seen as a deliberate infringement.
Regarding sensitive places: Heller left the door open to restrictions on carrying in sensitive places, and there are already a couple cases in the pipeline fighting about what a sensitive place is, and is not.
I suspect public parks won’t make the cut.
Then it’ll be another 11% in a couple of years, and the left will get their de facto prohibition.
If they actually did so, the extra 11% would be struck down. There clearly will be a cumulative percentage that can survive as constitutional and a cumulative percentage that can’t.
It’s racist.
The highest sales tax rate I can find is less than 11%
7.25% in 2022. Going to be a hard sell for 11% on one classification of product.
I feel for the good Californians who exercise their second amendment rights.
They are outnumbered by emotional infantile toddlers who would trade a right for a false sense of security.
San Jose residents in particular. Since they have to pay firearm insurance or have their firearms seized.
They didn’t even raise it that high in KCKS to pay for the multi-billion dollar NASCAR track.
Check out the going cannabis tax rates. I could see some jackasses using that as the justification to tax it that high.
An odd way to campaign for President.
Nothing will curb gang firearm use.
And more money
By the definition of the word, yes it is. A tax on a Right, undermines that Right. However, there has long been (since 1937) a Federal excise tax on guns, ammunition and some other outdoor sporting goods. The tax, as regulated under the Pittman-Robertson Act, is allocated to the Wildlife Restoration Fund and Sportfish Restoration Fund, and apportioned to conservation programs in all 50 states based on land area and hunting and fishing licenses. We have a very fine indoor shooting range operated by the State F&G here in Fairbanks that was built with those funds.
Newsome tax is supposedly allocated to school safety … but what specifically is an open ended question.
Just to play devil’s advocate, the 2nd addresses the right to keep and bear arms. It doesn’t mention the procurement process.
