So if voter ID is a poll tax and against the constitution, why isnt sales tax on guns

[OutHouse]

why is it ok to charge a government sales tax on my constitutionally guaranteed right to buy guns and ammo but its against the constitution to ID at the polls because its a poll tax.

 

[Anarchist420]

Such a good question that I can't answer it. I also believe that the NFA needs to be repealed.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Pursue it. All you need is a Supreme Court ruling which is why poll taxes are considered unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause.

Should be easy enough.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Murdock v. Pennsylvania

Nope!

Page [319 U.S. 105, 113] reads... The privilege in question exists apart from state authority. It is guaranteed the people by the federal constitution. viz., The state cannot and does not have the power to license, nor tax, a Right guaranteed to the people.
Although it is not technically correct to say that this decision reversed Jones v. Opelika (1942), because the Court vacated Jones in a per curiam decision handed down the same day; in fact, that was the effect of this decision.
Murdock is a landmark decision which had the effect of allowing Jehovah's Witnesses and other religious groups who sold literature door-to-door to avoid paying licensing taxes to distribute their literature. The neutral imposition of the tax on solicitation performed by a religious group did not make it constitutionally acceptable. In addition, the Court drew a distinction between commercial activity and religious activity that involves the selling of religious literature.

 

[DrPizza]

why is it ok to charge a government sales tax on my constitutionally guaranteed right to buy guns and ammo but its against the constitution to ID at the polls because its a poll tax.

That's a good question. I never thought about it before, and now I'm wondering what the answer is.

 

[Doppel]

I am not entirely sure why but I suspect that in light of the Heller ruling it could be quite reasonable to challenge all pistol permit fees under the same argument. They are constitutionally guaranteed, so why must a person pay for them, since in many states it is impossible to exercise this right without paying the fee?

 

[etrigan420]

Here in Washington, they don't call it "Sales Tax", they call it "Use Tax".

I wonder if they get away with it due to simple semantics...:\

 

[shortylickens]

Guns are made and sold by private companies, voter polls are run by the government.

 

[Lithium381]

sales tax on a sold item, i can maybe understand as it applies to everything. . .. but the licensce fees, and the permit fees and all that . . . . they say those are administrative fees, not taxes. . .

 

[ivwshane]

I'm going to assume this is an honest question and you guys are indeed looking for the answer.

First off, requiring an ID to vote is not a poll tax. Having to pay for that ID or making it difficult for a disproportional group of people to vote is considered a poll tax.

Second of all the illegality of the poll tax has been specifically addressed by the 24th amendment, no such clause exists for firearms.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

And of course the 14th amendment also has requirements regarding people's rights as well.



Now that you know the answer does that mean we won't be seeing anyone trying to argue against taxes on firearms? Or equating the taxes to poll taxes?

 

[nehalem256]

First off, requiring an ID to vote is not a poll tax. Having to pay for that ID or making it difficult for a disproportional group of people to vote is considered a poll tax.

Correct. Any current scheme requiring photo ID is not a poll tax.

Now that you know the answer does that mean we won't be seeing anyone trying to argue against taxes on firearms? Or equating the taxes to poll taxes?

The Supreme Court ruled that government has the power to compel people to do what ever they want through taxes (or any system that can be claimed to be a tax even if the people passing the law clearly say its not a tax).

This obviously excludes poll taxes which are explicitly prohibited.

I think the only real question is how long it takes for Republicans to figure out they can tax abortion.

 

[sandorski]

I propose the radical idea that Voting is fundamentally far more important.

 

[schneiderguy]

I propose the radical idea that Voting is fundamentally far more important.

People actually believe that voting changes anything?

Voting is a distraction to placate the masses by letting them think they have a voice.

 

[sandorski]

People actually believe that voting changes anything?

Voting is a distraction to placate the masses by letting them think they have a voice.

Voting changes things far more than Guns do. In a Democratic system anyway.

 

[monovillage]

Voting changes things far more than Guns do. In a Democratic system anyway.

One of your heroes said "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun" Why did you change your mind?

 

[sandorski]

One of your heroes said "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun" Why did you change your mind?

 

[Moonbeam]

Poll taxes were made illegal by the 24th amendment. Excise taxes are legal with the following rationale:

In defense of excises on strong drink, Adam Smith wrote: "It has for some time past been the policy of Great Britain to discourage the consumption of spirituous liquors, on account of their supposed tendency to ruin the health and to corrupt the morals of the common people."[3] Samuel Johnson was less flattering in his 1755 dictionary: "EXCI'SE. n.s. ... A hateful tax levied upon commodities, and adjudged not by the common judges of property, but wretches hired by those to whom excise is paid."[4]

Monies raised through excise are often earmarked for redress of specific social costs commonly associated with the product or service being taxed. Tobacco tax revenues, for example, might be spent on government anti-smoking campaigns.

Excise duties or taxes often serve political as well as financial ends. Public safety and health, public morals, environmental protection, and national defense are all rationales for the imposition of an excise.
Public safety and health – deter individuals from harming their health by abusing substances such as tobacco and alcohol, thus making excise a kind of sumptuary tax, or
deter them from engaging in morally objectionable activities such as gambling and prostitution (see below) (including solicitation and pimping) – thus making it a type of vice tax or sin tax

Environmental protection - deter individuals or organizations from harming the general environment, including curbing activities which contribute to pollution, or which harm the natural environment.

Defense - including taxation directly levied on other countries' militaries and/or governments, such as the UK's taxation on "visiting forces"
Punitive - Many US states taxes on drugs, as well as the UK government impose excise on money laundering and on "visiting forces" (i.e., occupying military forces). These taxes are not considered revenue sources, but rather exist to allow governments greater leverage for punishments and reparations/war reparations - based mainly around tax evasion - which can be imposed in the event that the perpetrator is caught and tried.

 

[Fenixgoon]

I'm going to assume this is an honest question and you guys are indeed looking for the answer.

First off, requiring an ID to vote is not a poll tax. Having to pay for that ID or making it difficult for a disproportional group of people to vote is considered a poll tax.

Second of all the illegality of the poll tax has been specifically addressed by the 24th amendment, no such clause exists for firearms.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

And of course the 14th amendment also has requirements regarding people's rights as well.



Now that you know the answer does that mean we won't be seeing anyone trying to argue against taxes on firearms? Or equating the taxes to poll taxes?

poll tax is also a generic term for adding cost to exercising a right.

hence, a tax on firearms IS a poll tax in the sense that you are adding cost for someone to exercise their right as protected by the constitution.

 

[monovillage]

poll tax is also a generic term for adding cost to exercising a right.

hence, a tax on firearms IS a poll tax in the sense that you are adding cost for someone to exercise their right as protected by the constitution.

Let alone the cost for a background check, the cost for a handgun safety certificate, the cost of the transfer fee, training certificate costs , taxes on ammunition and the well loved 10 day waiting period. How about the idea that even an accusation can take the right away from people, it doesn't even require a conviction.

The same leftist progressive assholes though continue to defend the idea that they really care about rights and the Constitution.

 

[ivwshane]

poll tax is also a generic term for adding cost to exercising a right.

hence, a tax on firearms IS a poll tax in the sense that you are adding cost for someone to exercise their right as protected by the constitution.

That may be true but it doesn't make it illegal like it is with respect to voting.

 

[Screech]

Guns are not free, nor has any reasonable reading of the second amendment ever held that guns should be given out freely.

Hence, costs for said right are not illegal.

Conversely, the opposite is generally true for voting.

 

[monovillage]

Guns are not free, nor has any reasonable reading of the second amendment ever held that guns should be given out freely.

Hence, costs for said right are not illegal.

Conversely, the opposite is generally true for voting.

You can get a free lawyer since right to counsel is considered a right, voting is free, why should owning a firearm, which every reasonable person considers a right, be so costly?

 

[Genx87]

I propose the radical idea that Voting is fundamentally far more important.

When a govt agent comes crashing down your door. Quickly, go vote your way out of it.

 

[Genx87]

Voting changes things far more than Guns do. In a Democratic system anyway.

And those changes are enforced by the barrel of a gun.

 

[PokerGuy]

I propose the radical idea that Voting is fundamentally far more important.

I think this idiotic 'thought' is honestly the reason why the libs think it's OK to trample on the 2nd. To them, just because it's a right granted in the constitution like the others still doesn't make it "equal" to other rights the libs like better or consider more important.