Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 13 of 51
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Kaufman county, Texas
    Posts
    10,168

    Non-gun owners should be charged a tax. 5% on all purchases.

    Basically, non-gun owners are riding the safety net created by gun owners. They have no means of self defense, they are riding the safety net of neighbors with guns. And whining to tax us with police protection. All the while, their homes are protected with our guns and/or the perception that they MAY have a gun in the home whether they do or not.

    There is nothing in the bill of rights that guarantees police protection, only self defense.

    If one wants to forgo the responsibility of self protection, fine, but we need to assign some more police to protect your defenseless selves so we need a surcharge to afford this.

    5% usage tax, dedicated to policing. If it saves one life it is worth it.
    "You boys are really making this thing harder than it has to be". Me

    "Who ARE you people? And WHAT are you doing in my SWAMP!?" Shrek

    Service calls submitted after 3PM will be posted the next business day.

    I give free estimates [Wild Ass Guesses] over the phone.

    "I am sorry for interrupting, please continue with your quarreling" Some chick on TV

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    95
    My guns are for myself and my familys protection only. If you are a friend I will help you out also. So if you dont have a way to protect your self and Im around, sorry. In my state there is too much liability and Im not a paid officer. Otherwise I will be a good witness to the crime.

    Sent from my SCH-I905 using Tapatalk 2

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    978
    Perfect!. Just find out who does not have guns and the rest is easy.
    Never argue with a crazy man.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,268
    Riiiiight

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    I'm an old cowhand from the Rio Grande
    Posts
    17,089
    Quote Originally Posted by Tool-Slinger View Post
    Basically, non-gun owners are riding the safety net created by gun owners. All the while, their homes are protected with our guns and/or the perception that they MAY have a gun in the home whether they do or not.



    If one wants to forgo the responsibility of self protection, fine, but we need to assign some more police to protect your defenseless selves so we need a surcharge to afford this.
    Why would these non-gun owners need police? You just said your guns provide a safety net and protect their homes.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Grand Junction, CO
    Posts
    236
    My neighbors have as many guns as i do. Our street is good

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    North Richland Hills, Texas
    Posts
    14,915
    If more government is the answer, then it's a really stupid question.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    British Columbia, Canada
    Posts
    524
    Quote Originally Posted by geerair View Post
    Why would these non-gun owners need police? You just said your guns provide a safety net and protect their homes.
    Someones got to move the bodies of the scumbag criminals. It's against the law to touch a dead body unless you have the authority...

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    3,108
    "There is no greater inequality than the equal treatment of unequals."

    -Thomas Jefferson

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Kaufman county, Texas
    Posts
    10,168
    This is not conceptually a new idea. Privileged folks avoided service in the Union army during the civil war by paying a tax.

    No service to your community, pay a tax.

    Simple concept. I am sure even the knuckle dragging liberals here can understand it.

    Do your duty, or pay someone else to do it.

    Anti-gun owners want someone else to take the responsibility [cops] for their safety and I understand and accept that philosophy. So pay for it. 5% tax.

    5%. This is not a 'wuss tax'. Ideologically, you want to delegate personal safety to police. Fine. PAY FOR IT. Look at Chicago, A crime and police response nightmare. A 5% tax might help fund the police, who will currently not even respond to burglaries or car theft in a timely fashion.

    http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2013/02/...ome-911-calls/

    He’s making those decisions because of the city’s financial woes.

    You people that don't want to have guns, you need more police. So pay for it and stop being babies about it. Pay up. 5%. Support the police you are asking for. Me and the folks in my hood all have guns and are pretty safe as a general measure. I understand, most anti-gun owners are insecure and unsafe. You can have all the security you want, a mere 5% tax.
    "You boys are really making this thing harder than it has to be". Me

    "Who ARE you people? And WHAT are you doing in my SWAMP!?" Shrek

    Service calls submitted after 3PM will be posted the next business day.

    I give free estimates [Wild Ass Guesses] over the phone.

    "I am sorry for interrupting, please continue with your quarreling" Some chick on TV

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,268
    The problem is.....most gun owners are against a national gun registry...your proposed tax ensures that a gun registry happens... how else will they know who to tax?

    Besides...you act like just because a person doesn't have a gun that they are weak and defenseless...that's not true at all.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    3,108
    So if you don't pay the tax, do you waive any rights you may have had to utilize the services of the police department?

    I have guns, and I'm further to the center than most of you, but I'll play along.
    "There is no greater inequality than the equal treatment of unequals."

    -Thomas Jefferson

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Kaufman county, Texas
    Posts
    10,168
    Quote Originally Posted by AStudent View Post
    The problem is.....most gun owners are against a national gun registry...your proposed tax ensures that a gun registry happens... how else will they know who to tax?

    Besides...you act like just because a person doesn't have a gun that they are weak and defenseless...that's not true at all.
    Not sure about a gun database, just proof of ownership. There may be more guns, so I think that would work.

    Persons who do not own a gun a gun are IN FACT weak and defenseless in certain known crime situations. This is a known and proven fact, when little girls and old women have an equalizer of force with a gun in hand. Kung Fu whoop ass guy..... LOL
    "You boys are really making this thing harder than it has to be". Me

    "Who ARE you people? And WHAT are you doing in my SWAMP!?" Shrek

    Service calls submitted after 3PM will be posted the next business day.

    I give free estimates [Wild Ass Guesses] over the phone.

    "I am sorry for interrupting, please continue with your quarreling" Some chick on TV

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Comfortech Show Promo Image

Related Forums

Plumbing Talks | Contractor Magazine
Forums | Electrical Construction & Maintenance (EC&M) Magazine
Comfortech365 Virtual Event