this post was submitted on 21 May 2024
482 points (93.5% liked)

News

23376 readers
2078 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 27 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (62 children)

I've been saying for years this was going to be what happens, instead of common sense gun laws they are just going to tax the shit out of it. Which sucks for law abiding responsible gun owners who just want to hunt or defend themselves. This is what happens when one side refuses to come to the negotiating table.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The constitutionality of this tax will come down to how the Roberts Court wants to interpret and apply the 200-year old concept first issued in an opinion during the Marshall Court -- the power to tax is the power to destroy. The government cannot use its authority to levy taxes in a manner which significantly encroaches on the exercise of an enumerated right. I like CA's idea here, but it's all going to come down to implementation.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 months ago (3 children)

"As a giant chicken with a southern accent wearing a judges robe, this here tax is unconstitutional on the grounds of me not liking it." -The Roberts court, most likely

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago

Foghorn Leghorn had more integrity and righteousness than the justices on the current SCOTUS

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago

In my heart I genuinely wish that I could argue to the contrary, reality is just dashing my dreams term over term.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 6 months ago

There's also this crazy thing called an illegal market which circumvents tax entirely

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Tbf, define "refuses." Suppressors, SBS, SBR, 1932; Background Checks, 1968; Full auto ban, 1986; AWB, 1994-2004, expired, little to no measurable impact on crime.

And yet they push and push to get the AWB back despite the fact that those guns make up less than .01% of our gun deaths, why would I think that rounding down that .01% would be "enough" and they wouldn't then progress to handguns which are demonstrably the highest contributing type of arms? Frankly there has been those compromises in the past and yet they continue to push already, it wouldn't make sense for them to stop pushing for the 99.99% once they get the .01%, they just know the "well handguns for protection I understand but those assault weapons are automagical murder machines" crowd won't go for it yet.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

And sucks even more for POC because statistically they don't have the monetary means that white people do. So higher taxes mean less legal guns for POC... Oh, wait, the law is working the way it's intended.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Sure, but you say that guns are a human right like housing or food.

No one needs a gun.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

De facto is a right in the USA by the 2A. Try again. I didn't say it was the equivalent of food but it is a right.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

But it's not an important "right" in the slightest.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

This is what happens when one side refuses to come to the negotiating table

Say for the sake of argument, I am President of the NRA and I can persuade my members to agree with whatever comes out of negotiations and you are on the other side, seeking a 'reasonable compromise' on gun ownership and some 'common sense' gun control legislation.

What are you willing to compromise on? What are you willing to give up??

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

How often do people really defend themselves with lethal force?

Are your criminals weird or something? Do they shoot people at every opportunity?

No, defending property doesn't justify lethal force.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

I live on a farm, an hour from town. The sheriff response time is about 45 minutes usually. Meth heads roam around looking for stuff to steal. There's also wild dogs, Coyotes, and also wild pigs that will kill you given the opportunity. I truly hope that I'm never in a position where I have to take a human life. But having a gun is a necessity out here, even if you only have to fire a warning shot to get the crackheads to scatter. I also hunt, not even just for sport, game meat is a not inconsequential portion of our food supply. Wild pigs are a very real concern, they will gore you before you can even blink, and they can run at close to 40 MPH.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago

I absolutely get hunting rifles we have a lot of them here and as far as I know they are rarely used or crime.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Maybe don’t let those wild pigs in when they ring your doorbell? Even if they huff and puff

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

Even if they huff and puff

Be careful - there's a correlation between huffing, puffing, and houses being blown down.

load more comments (56 replies)