General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Why The Gun Lobby Is Terrified Of California - from Mother Jones - *5-cent tax on each bullet* [View all]Crepuscular
(1,057 posts)Your claim that lighter ones are used more for targets makes little sense, unless you are implying that heavier bullets are used more for violent acts, which is ridiculous.
Other than .22 rimfire cartridges (which should be excluded from any kind of an ammo tax) I doubt there is any kind of correlation between bullet weight and frequency of use. Competitive match shooters use a wide range of calibers, from .22 to .30, with a wide range of bullet weights, as well. Hunters use calibers ranging from .17 up to .50, again with a wide range of bullet weights, which has little to do with either the lethality of the weapon or the propensity for it being used for criminal purposes.
Doubt you will find many muggers using a 45/70 with a 405 gr. bullet, they will be more likely to use a .22 pistol with a 20 gr. bullet, so again, what exactly is the rationale behind taxing the ammunition used by a hunter at a 20 times higher rate?
And as long as we are at it, what's the rationale again for taxing ammo? Is the purpose designed to actually result in some tangible reduction in crime or is it intended to be strictly punitive in nature, designed to punish law abiding individuals who dare to own guns?