Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

krispos42

(49,445 posts)
130. For the $200 transfer tax.
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 03:04 PM
Jan 2013

Maybe the solution is to have a $20 universal transfer tax on all firearms, which is used to run a NICS check.



This might be another way to accomplish it, rather than a mandate. Hmmm...

You say, "For protection, guns are pretty much useless as defense ..." Then, don't check out this: AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #1
If someone was in the mood, he or she could probably use that information ZombieHorde Jan 2013 #5
From a site whose logo says: NashvilleLefty Jan 2013 #6
"911 did not stop an Indiana home invasion, three bullets did" AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #2
THREE bullets, not 30. NashvilleLefty Jan 2013 #4
Yes, "three bullets." AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #24
Because the victim sylvi Jan 2013 #99
So this "Home Invasion" should have been stopped before it happened intaglio Jan 2013 #106
Agreed. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #110
No matter what legislation you can come up with the doc03 Jan 2013 #3
True, which is why we need to keep pointing out the holes NashvilleLefty Jan 2013 #7
Have you ever looked at the gun magazines on the market? Most of them have a doc03 Jan 2013 #9
Who is Berserker Jan 2013 #10
Yep! and he talks to me. He also has a CCW. nt NashvilleLefty Jan 2013 #139
Your "trained professionals" argument is false rl6214 Jan 2013 #8
I was only repeated the arguments used NashvilleLefty Jan 2013 #13
About 90% of the people that own guns safeinOhio Jan 2013 #23
Oh great, a gun toter that thinks they are better than police. Hoyt Jan 2013 #71
I am a better shot than some police rl6214 Jan 2013 #79
That's what MANY people believe.... NashvilleLefty Jan 2013 #140
I have trained cops to shoot rl6214 Jan 2013 #142
You need to read more... cbrer Jan 2013 #11
I would LOVE to have a discussion based in reality. NashvilleLefty Jan 2013 #14
Correllation does not equal causation. dairydog91 Jan 2013 #21
It's pretty simple. krispos42 Jan 2013 #12
Ah yes, the NRA slippery slope nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #17
It's here. krispos42 Jan 2013 #18
It s based on California's nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #20
"Incidentally", indeed. dairydog91 Jan 2013 #22
It is funny, another NRA talking point nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #27
"Summary of 2013 Feinstein Assault Weapons Legislation" krispos42 Jan 2013 #25
If I had my way, the 1934 legislation would apply nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #28
There's 108,000 words in California law. krispos42 Jan 2013 #30
Well, I want at a minimum universal background checks nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #37
I agree with you. krispos42 Jan 2013 #39
No, it has to be federal. nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #48
10th Amendment. krispos42 Jan 2013 #50
Do guns cross state lines? nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #54
And when they are sold across state lines, it's through FFLs. krispos42 Jan 2013 #62
This is why it has to be federal nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #63
But it won't be. krispos42 Jan 2013 #64
How so? nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #65
Because it's an intrastate transfer. krispos42 Jan 2013 #66
I am telling you the way it is nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #70
And we can't get federal krispos42 Jan 2013 #73
Yup, you got ths figured out nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #85
For what record? krispos42 Jan 2013 #93
Florida do this???? nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #112
So because Texas won't do it, California shouldn't? n/t krispos42 Jan 2013 #113
If it is going to work, truly, it needs to be federal nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #124
It needs to be as widespread as possible. krispos42 Jan 2013 #125
It needs to be federal nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #126
If Washington can make that happen, then fine. krispos42 Jan 2013 #127
The same argument was made for the 1934 legislation nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #128
For the $200 transfer tax. krispos42 Jan 2013 #130
They are talking national databases and universal nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #131
I agree on consistent and universal checks SQUEE Jan 2013 #123
Isnt that the point? If the 1994 was ineffective, why not expand it? jmg257 Jan 2013 #29
Ban more cosmetic features? krispos42 Jan 2013 #35
Yep..what you said. If I was serious, I would, or close to it. jmg257 Jan 2013 #43
Of course, if we really wanted to cut gun violence... krispos42 Jan 2013 #45
Agreed...drugs, and gangs deserve much more scrutiny. nt jmg257 Jan 2013 #51
Let's look at a California legal "assault weapon" hack89 Jan 2013 #60
And this one is illegal in CA (gun image warning for those that are bothered by them) Recursion Jan 2013 #78
But shouldn't it be? booley Apr 2013 #143
Sounds like a good start... 99Forever Jan 2013 #19
If you want to use the same language and argument style as... krispos42 Jan 2013 #26
If you want to use the same language and argument style as... 99Forever Jan 2013 #33
Civil libertarians are terrorist-enablers. Remember that line? krispos42 Jan 2013 #40
Oh goody! 99Forever Jan 2013 #47
*pats head* krispos42 Jan 2013 #53
I can't help that you are a living... 99Forever Jan 2013 #55
Mirror, mirror... n/t krispos42 Jan 2013 #59
Yep... 99Forever Jan 2013 #67
.. pipoman Jan 2013 #15
Perhaps I should have said "NRA TALKING PINT supporters" NashvilleLefty Jan 2013 #32
LOL pipoman Jan 2013 #49
WHY is it "silly"? NashvilleLefty Jan 2013 #83
It's nice to quote "they" pipoman Jan 2013 #96
If you want to go back through all the threads NashvilleLefty Jan 2013 #102
I'm not searching threads for that which I know isn't there.. pipoman Jan 2013 #108
You claim you "know" they are not there, how do you "know"? NashvilleLefty Jan 2013 #133
Oh, because I've been around for 6 years or so and pipoman Jan 2013 #137
No, the arguments against the old AWB are pretty coherent. dairydog91 Jan 2013 #16
As for your point #1, NashvilleLefty Jan 2013 #36
It's not reasonable to ban things by default. Glaug-Eldare Jan 2013 #134
1. They are unimportant only in their impact on crime. PavePusher Jan 2013 #141
Well that certainly brought out the billh58 Jan 2013 #31
They certainly seem to be well-organized. NashvilleLefty Jan 2013 #42
I'm afraid that a "reality based" billh58 Jan 2013 #44
No just pointing out the fiction of your OP pipoman Jan 2013 #68
What fiction? I have yet to see a reality-based argument. NashvilleLefty Jan 2013 #81
This is a "it stands to reason" statement pipoman Jan 2013 #97
Yeah sylvi Jan 2013 #100
And another Gungeoneer billh58 Jan 2013 #119
I see less "discussion" sylvi Jan 2013 #135
"... most shooters are stopped while reloading." Any evidence? EDIT - I'm right. OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #34
Loughner was stopped by a retired nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #38
That was one incident; the OP said "most", which is total crap. OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #75
And I stand by my assertion nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #82
That "NRA Talking Point" card is getting raggedy. OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #92
I noticed nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #111
Loughner was reloading because his POS hi cap mag jammed rl6214 Jan 2013 #94
Same thing with recent school shooter, gun jam. Then he killed himself with the handguns. Sunlei Jan 2013 #132
Big +1 rl6214 Jan 2013 #138
Actually, the "Department of Needs" is called Congress. NashvilleLefty Jan 2013 #41
The point he's making is that a person doesn't have to define a 'need' for an item; X_Digger Jan 2013 #46
Then how was the AWB not challenged on that basis? NashvilleLefty Jan 2013 #57
"Promote the Common Good" is not a blank check to write whatever law a body wishes. X_Digger Jan 2013 #58
It wasn't challeneged because it was pointless. It didn't actually keep people from buying guns Recursion Jan 2013 #80
If it was "pointless", then why argue against it? NashvilleLefty Jan 2013 #84
Why argue against a pointless law that gives Republicans control of the House? Recursion Jan 2013 #89
My first AR type weapon was made by Olympic arms and also rl6214 Jan 2013 #95
I haven't seen too many posts that Jenoch Jan 2013 #52
Zimmerman. repeat Zimmerman. Repeat Zimmerman. The poster boy of the NRA. graham4anything Jan 2013 #56
Zimmerman? sylvi Jan 2013 #98
It takes decades for a redwood seed to grow into a majestic redwood graham4anything Jan 2013 #101
That's very poetic sylvi Jan 2013 #103
It took 100 years from Lincoln to LBJ. Patience is a virtue. Even God took 6 days before resting. graham4anything Jan 2013 #104
Platitudes sylvi Jan 2013 #105
Taking all LEGAL guns out of the street is the only way ANY meaningful advancement can happen graham4anything Jan 2013 #107
A "new law" can't be unconstitutional pipoman Jan 2013 #109
Why are you talking about the mafia? graham4anything Jan 2013 #115
Just more of the same.. pipoman Jan 2013 #136
Too bad possessing a gun for self defense is a constitutional right. nt hack89 Jan 2013 #61
The cosmetic feature that matters is the pistol grip, and it's what people actually want to ban Recursion Jan 2013 #69
What I want to ban is allowing those attracted to such crap having right to buy one. Hoyt Jan 2013 #72
Yes, I do get that Recursion Jan 2013 #74
Great, so we have another 100 million of the dang things, and will have another 100 M in decade, so Hoyt Jan 2013 #116
We have less than 50% the murder rate of 20 years ago Recursion Jan 2013 #118
And yet you keep buying guns. Of course 50% has nothing to do with NRA types and their guns. Hoyt Jan 2013 #121
I don't own any guns. I live in a city where it's difficult to, and I don't like them Recursion Jan 2013 #122
I'm a little confused about this - how does the pistol grip make the gun safer? jmg257 Jan 2013 #76
It makes drops less likely, and firing from the hip nearly impossible Recursion Jan 2013 #77
So, then it is NOT "cosmetic". NashvilleLefty Jan 2013 #87
True, in that sense. It's functional in that it's a safety feature. Recursion Jan 2013 #90
No, but it doesn't do what I think you think it does.. sir pball Jan 2013 #114
^ That Recursion Jan 2013 #117
This message was self-deleted by its author logicnreason Jan 2013 #86
Is that you Mr. Weiner? nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #88
Get the one for concealed carry: TTE, "If you make us open carry, we will be the first targets patrice Jan 2013 #91
not sure why you call all pro 2A posters NRA supporters backwoodsbob Jan 2013 #120
What do we need the NRA for anyway? They are today just a lobbyist for gun sellers & bribe politics. Sunlei Jan 2013 #129
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Most, if not all, of the ...»Reply #130