quote:

Originally posted by flashguy:

quote:

Originally posted by Spokane228:
Good. Appeal it all the way to the Supreme Court so we can win these cases and put all this to bed. Permenatly.

Yep. "A right taxed is a right denied" is a strong precedent.

flashguy

We already have that precedent.

"The power to tax is the power to destroy.” (1819)
~Chief Justice Marshall

quote:

Originally posted by Fenris:

quote:

Originally posted by flashguy:

quote:

Originally posted by Spokane228:
Good. Appeal it all the way to the Supreme Court so we can win these cases and put all this to bed. Permenatly.

Yep. "A right taxed is a right denied" is a strong precedent.

flashguy

We already have that precedent.

"The power to tax is the power to destroy.” (1819)
~Chief Justice Marshall

I know. I was not proposing a new rule, but expressing one that exists.

flashguy

quote:

Originally posted by 911Boss:
No sales tax on mail order, so no effect. I'm not too concerned about it spreading to other cities as the liberal loonies are pretty localized. Other cities are less willing to loose the other revenues of driving businesses out of town by pushing an agenda.

I'm unsure about the Second Amendment Foundation, but the NRA would not have not have gotten involved in this case if they didn't share my concerns of this "gun violence tax" spreading to other cities, perhaps even beyond the State of Washington. And quoting from the article:

Seattle City Councilmember Tim "Burgess called the ruling a “huge win” and said he hopes other Washington cities “now feel comfortable to follow suit” by adopting their own taxes on gun sales."

In my first post, I used past tense about what I "suspected" about this tax since the intentions of Seattle's city council and their pederast mayor have now been publicly acknowledged.

Quick edit to add: just give Seattle some time to impose an online ammunition sales tax

Mail order may currently escape this tax. But don't count on it. States already claim the right to tax residents for on-line tax free purchases. Then you have the risk of prosecution for tax fraud if you failed to pay the "Violence Tax".

quote:

Originally posted by ChicagoSigMan:
Not sure of the history of this case, but it wasn't brought as a 2A case. It was simply an interpretation of a state statute that hinged on the definition of a tax vs. a regulation.

I don't see anything in the opinion that is egregiously erroneous from a legal point of view.

I am curious why this wasn't attacked on constitutional grounds in federal court - the tax is basically a 25% levy on ammunition, which seems like it could have problems passing muster.

My understanding is the argument was whether it violated the State preemption on firearms laws.

quote:

Originally posted by 911Boss:

quote:

Originally posted by ChicagoSigMan:
Not sure of the history of this case, but it wasn't brought as a 2A case. It was simply an interpretation of a state statute that hinged on the definition of a tax vs. a regulation.

I don't see anything in the opinion that is egregiously erroneous from a legal point of view.

I am curious why this wasn't attacked on constitutional grounds in federal court - the tax is basically a 25% levy on ammunition, which seems like it could have problems passing muster.

My understanding is the argument was whether it violated the State preemption on firearms laws.

That is correct. The state preempts local "regulation" of firearms, and the court ruled that taxation for the purpose of raising revenue is not regulation. Simple straightforward matter of statutory interpretation. Maybe some of our WA members are more familiar with the case can tell us why there were no federal constitutional claims brought here.

That they'd rule unconstitutional.

quote:

Originally posted by Dakor:
How about taxes on stupid decisions from the bench? Too bad we can't hold judges accountable for parolee crimes...

Seattle city council now wants to tax all guns sold in the city limits to $50.00 per gun, doubling the tax. Also tax .25 cent per round sold. Let's see how high they'll go in the next 12-24 months to follow. It's not regulation