# Biden: $200 Gun Tax, Plus....



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

> According to Joe Biden's plan in order to register a firearm, you have to fill out a complicated 13-page application form and include a $200 gun tax for each firearm you own.





> Your fingerprints and a photograph of yourself will be required on the form.


https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/01/biden-proposes-200-gun-tax-firearm-buyback-program-along-13-page-form-asks-fingerprints-photograph/


----------



## Back Pack Hack (Sep 15, 2016)

Guns are bad. But if you surrender your Constitutional rights and pay a tax that was not voted on, you can keep them.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Plus each magazine that holds more than 10 rounds must be registered and a $200 tax for EACH one.
I’m hoping that this will not make it through both Houses.
But there’s always the chance it will be included in a “must pass” bill.


----------



## stevekozak (Oct 4, 2015)

One-handed typing: Register THIS!!!


----------



## Sasquatch (Dec 12, 2014)

So Joe and the Dems are saying low income folks have no right to protect themselves? Guns are only for the rich?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## 2020 Convert (Dec 24, 2020)

What Guns???????


----------



## Piratesailor (Nov 9, 2012)

I guess he will make millions of instant felons. 

Good luck enforcing it. 

Remember the oven mitts.


----------



## Demitri.14 (Nov 21, 2018)

If I have to go thru all that trouble, I might as well just buy a machine gun or grenade launcher !


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

rice paddy daddy said:


> But there's always the chance it will be included in a "must pass" bill.


Yep, put it in a reconciliation bill that only requires a simple majority to pass.


----------



## ErickthePutz (Jan 10, 2021)

This too, will go to SCOTUS. I’ll wait.


----------



## Trihonda (Aug 24, 2020)

But will this pass SCOTUS? It will most certainly be challenged. And one could make a strong (very strong) argument that $200 tax (or registration, for that matter) is an infringement. I will most certainly become a felon if this passes... At least until said time as political pendulum swings back to sanity and all that crap is repealed. Then I'll dredge the lake that my guns fell into, and miraculously find all my lost guns...


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

Trihonda said:


> But will this pass SCOTUS? It will most certainly be challenged. And one could make a strong (very strong) argument that $200 tax (or registration, for that matter) is an infringement. I will most certainly become a felon if this passes... At least until said time as political pendulum swings back to sanity and all that crap is repealed. Then I'll dredge the lake that my guns fell into, and miraculously find all my lost guns...


$200 would be the same as a poll tax which has clearly been ruled to be UnConstitutional. Why do the Commies hate poor people and minorities? Why do poor folks and minorities do not know this?


----------



## Hemi45 (May 5, 2014)

Dang it! Way to increase demand for lever and blot action rifles I want ... that are already backordered.


----------



## NKAWTG (Feb 14, 2017)

Will SCOTUS do the right thing?


----------



## Chipper (Dec 22, 2012)

Keep pushin morons. Do they really think people will comply??


----------



## Back Pack Hack (Sep 15, 2016)

Chipper said:


> Keep pushin morons. Do they really think people will comply??


Most of the law-abiding sheep will. But the _criminals _won't. And that's the disconnect politicians have with reality.


----------



## Piratesailor (Nov 9, 2012)

NKAWTG said:


> Will SCOTUS do the right thing?


And there is the overriding question.

You would think the 1994 ban would have been unconstitutional and struck down.. but it wasn't.

If it's just a tax would they consider it "infringement "


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

NKAWTG said:


> Will SCOTUS do the right thing?


You mean the same SCOTUS that won't preside over the impeachment hearing and prescribed in Article 1 section 3? That same SCOTUS?


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

Back Pack Hack said:


> Most of the law-abiding sheep will. But the _criminals _won't. And that's the disconnect politicians have with reality.


Actually I remember reading that when Cuomo did the same thing in NY, very few people registered their guns. Oh Cuomo was pissed but couldn't do anything about it.


----------



## SOCOM42 (Nov 9, 2012)

RedLion said:


> $200 would be the same as a poll tax which has clearly been ruled to be (Unconstitutional). Why do the Commies hate poor people and minorities? Why do poor folks and minorities not know this?


Sad to say, they are stupid!

That is usually why they are poor also.

I have met some in the south that were challenged picking peaches.

Only idiots will listen to the BS promises of the demonrats and vote for them again and again, after 6 decades, nothing has changed for them.

The still listen to the same old BS and live in the same old squalor.

They don't have an Ingram between them that can see the D-rats for what they are.

Nothing good is going to come of this tax BS, it well may be the trigger of a Turner.


----------



## Piratesailor (Nov 9, 2012)

This is some good, if somewhat dry, reading about the 1994 and the effort around 2013 as well as how the heller case potentially could apply to future attempts at bans (and maybe taxes).

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42957.pdf

Couple of tidbits.... the 1994 case lost 2 SCOTUS challenges under the equal protection and interstate commerce clauses. It seemed to rely on the 1968 rulings and didn't pass muster for the 2nd amendment.

Note the terms "common use" and "dangerous and unusual" and that it's not solidly defined. 
Heller may have changed the playing field. See the following:

Based on the Heller decision where the Supreme Court indicated that certain weapons fall outside the protection of the Second Amendment, lower courts have examined whether the prohibited weapons are considered in "common use" or "commonly used" for lawful purposes or "dangerous and unusual." It is uncertain whether, to be protected under the Second Amendment, the weapon must be in "common use" by the people and if so, must it be in "common use" for self-defense or hunting, or what constitutes "dangerous and unusual." Heller could arguably be taken to indicate that if the prohibited weapons do not meet these criteria then they are not protected by the Second Amendment, in which case no heighted judicial scrutiny would be applied.

Courts also could evaluate such measures under the two-step approach laid out by the lower courts. This asks whether a ban on certain weapons and firearm accessories imposes a burden on conduct falling within the scope of the Second Amendment. If so, then a heightened level of judicial scrutiny will be applied to determine the ban's constitutionality. How the "common use" and "dangerous and unusual" criteria should be read, if at all, in connection with the two-step approach remains unclear. Neither the James, Heller II, nor Wilson courts appear to have fully explained the connection between the two approaches.


----------



## Piratesailor (Nov 9, 2012)

A little more. And easier reading from another article. 

“Of course, the Supreme Court will have the last word, and it has yet to rule on the constitutionality of assault weapon and LCM bans in the post-Heller world. Some have speculated that a challenge to an assault weapon ban could present the next Second Amendment case for the high court, and the Court is already deliberating whether to accept the appeal from the Seventh Circuit’s case. But don’t hold your breath. Despite more than 60 opportunities, the Supreme Court has yet to accept any Second Amendment cases other than handgun bans. Unless and until the Supreme Court decides to reenter the Second Amendment fray and dispute the consistent decisions in these cases, the holdings in the Second and Seventh Circuits will remain secure.“


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Hey! My old Garand and SKS don’t look so bad now, do they? :vs_laugh:


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

inceptor said:


> Actually I remember reading that when Cuomo did the same thing in NY, very few people registered their guns. Oh Cuomo was pissed but couldn't do anything about it.


Very true. Canadian citizens were successful in refusing to comply in getting the govt to ditch the long gun registry.


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

ErickthePutz said:


> This too, will go to SCOTUS. I'll wait.


So, what are you gonna do if SCOTUS approves of this bullshat?


----------



## SOCOM42 (Nov 9, 2012)

Slippy said:


> So, what are you gonna do if SCOTUS approves of this bullshat?


Incorporate La Marseillaise

FRENCH





ENGLISH SUBS, translation is not perfect but you get the point.


----------



## Piratesailor (Nov 9, 2012)

rice paddy daddy said:


> Hey! My old Garand and SKS don't look so bad now, do they? :vs_laugh:


Oh quit your gloating.. it's unseemly... :vs_laugh::tango_face_grin:


----------



## Nick (Nov 21, 2020)

I'm guessing that they won't try and push this through until after they pack the Supreme Court a liberal majority. You know it's going to happen. The Hoe already said she thinks this should happen and old Joe has been refusing to say he wouldn't do it since his nomination. Imagine all the unconstitutional laws they'll be able to pass with a majority in the court to.


----------



## ErickthePutz (Jan 10, 2021)

Slippy said:


> So, what are you gonna do if SCOTUS approves of this bullshat?


Certainly not post on the internet.


----------



## 2020 Convert (Dec 24, 2020)

I remember reading last week about a bill in AZ legislature to declare themselves as a 2A Sanctuary State. They set there own laws and will not follow federal.

A county in Utah approved this type of action early last year but I have not seen anything further on it.

Could locales override federal?


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

ErickthePutz said:


> Certainly not post on the internet.


C'mon Eric, you're amongst friends here so stop being a putz and tell us what you're gonna do when the libtard SCOTUS rules in favor of the Executive Branch taxing/confiscating your arms?

(And I ain't talking about the arms hanging out of your shirt sleeves! :vs_smirk


----------



## Steve40th (Aug 17, 2016)

Not even sure how to comprehend the money they want to juice us for.. Why? Nothing criminal about any of it, None of it..
I could always sell them to some chick named Nancy Pelosi.. Let her be responsible for explaining to ATF where she put them..'
But seriously, the amount of money for weapons and magazines is stupid. 
Making criminals out of a few hundred million people.


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

2020 Convert said:


> I remember reading last week about a bill in AZ legislature to declare themselves as a 2A Sanctuary State. They set there own laws and will not follow federal.
> 
> A county in Utah approved this type of action early last year but I have not seen anything further on it.
> 
> Could locales override federal?


The State of Arizona in which massive fraud occurred with the blessing of the state GOP? Technically the county Sheriff is the last line of defense of the Constitution when it comes to elected officials.


----------



## Big Boy in MO (Jan 22, 2018)

Missouri is changing from the SHOW ME STATE to the SHOW YOU STATE. We are already Constitutional Carry, Constitutional Concealed Carry and soon to be a 2nd Amendment Sanctuary State.

https://www.secondamendmentdaily.co...ied-an-objection-bill-has-resounding-support/

Missourian - Dedicated to the Sovereignty of Missourians


----------



## Alburt (Jan 25, 2020)

Rather than pay the tax I'm just going to change my registration to Democrat. I'm sure the Vice President will be will to go my bail also.


----------



## SOCOM42 (Nov 9, 2012)

Demitri.14 said:


> If I have to go thru all that trouble, I might as well just buy a machine gun or grenade launcher !


I already have them, am I going to have to pay another tax on them on top of the $200.00 transfer tax????

Are they going to tax all the belts and magazines I have for them.

I have an SP-1 that I have had since 1964, 57 years! Are the bastards going to tax that also???

Most of my guns have been in my possession for 30-50+ years, they can go F'K themselves.

Let me repeat, they can go F'K themselves.


----------



## Nick (Nov 21, 2020)

And so it begins....... Biden has appointed a commission to look at reforming the SCOTUS.


----------



## IS11 (Jan 9, 2021)

Chipper said:


> Keep pushin morons. Do they really think people will comply??


Yes, the democrats know that the people will comply. Maybe not at first, but eventually they will. I mean look at what just happened, the election was stolen and a criminal assumed the office of the potus and no one did anything.


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

IS11 said:


> Yes, the democrats know that the people will comply. Maybe not at first, but eventually they will. I mean look at what just happened, the election was stolen and a criminal assumed the office of the potus and no one did anything.


I don't think so. A while back Cuomo tried the same thing in NY. NY is a liberal state and it still failed. I could be wrong but I really don't think so.

The NY Post recently ran this article. It's an odd way to say the 80% of Americans do not supprt Biden or what he is doing. I suspect that disapproval number will increase soon enough. They also list some stats that are also odd. Check it out in the link below.



> Just one in five Americans have "a great deal of confidence" in President Biden's ability to make good on his goal to unify the country, according to a new poll released Sunday.


https://nypost.com/2021/01/24/1-in-5-have-confidence-biden-can-unite-the-country-poll/


----------



## Chiefster23 (Feb 5, 2016)

At least 2 democrat senators have committed to voting against any push to eliminate the filibuster. Without the filibuster none of this crazy legislation is going to make it thru the senate. No DC statehood or court packing. No court packing should mean no gun registration or confiscation.

In addition, the dems were a big pain in Trump’s ass by constantly court shopping to file suits and appeals in front of friendy judges. Now the shoe is on the other foot. Biden is signing the EOs so republicans can go to friendly conservative judges and block or delay much of his agenda. And even with the turn-coat Roberts on the SC, the conservative should still have a 5 to 4 majority. It’s still going to be a rough ride, but I hold out hope that some of the crazy stuff will be struck down.


----------



## Steve40th (Aug 17, 2016)

So, lets say Biden puts this tax through the ATF umbrella. The Gun Advocates would get said lawsuits immediately put before a judge for a stay, and expedite getting a case to SCOTUS... Is that possible? Will the SCOTUS, if it even got that far, want to see the case?


----------



## Tango2X (Jul 7, 2016)

This SCOTUS??


----------



## Steve40th (Aug 17, 2016)

Tango2X said:


> This SCOTUS??


Its all we have, technically that could stop the insanity.


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

Chiefster23 said:


> At least 2 democrat senators have committed to voting against any push to eliminate the filibuster. Without the filibuster none of this crazy legislation is going to make it thru the senate. No DC statehood or court packing. No court packing should mean no gun registration or confiscation.
> 
> In addition, the dems were a big pain in Trump's ass by constantly court shopping to file suits and appeals in front of friendy judges. Now the shoe is on the other foot. Biden is signing the EOs so republicans can go to friendly conservative judges and block or delay much of his agenda. And even with the turn-coat Roberts on the SC, the conservative should still have a 5 to 4 majority. It's still going to be a rough ride, but I hold out hope that some of the crazy stuff will be struck down.


Until the lefties win a 60+ majority in the Senate come 2022. GOP already has 4 rino senators that are not running for re-election in 2022. Plus they will again use massive fraud....plus....


> In the 2022 Senate races there are 34 seats up for grabs. 14 are held by Democrats and 20 are held by tenuous Republicans. [Breakdown Here] Due to vulnerability, their lack of support amid the republican base, and their insufferable 2020 behavior outing them as DeceptiCons it is almost guaranteed the GOP will lose seats in the 2022 mid-term election.
> 
> As a consequence Senators Richard Burr (NC), Ron Johnson (WI) and Pat Toomey (PA) had previously mentioned they were not going to seek reelection; now Senator Rob Portman (OH) makes the same announcement:
> 
> Things amid the DeceptiCon caucus are getting interesting. With four GOP senators having announced they're not running (Burr, Johnson, Toomey, Portman) there's essentially zero chance of the GOP retaking control of the Senate in 2022. [20 R seats up & only 14 D seats that are in solid D strongholds] it is far more likely the Democrats will gain seats, so keep this in mind&#8230;.


https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2021/01/25/decepticons-face-the-fail-senator-rob-portman-announces-he-will-not-seek-reelection/


----------



## Chiefster23 (Feb 5, 2016)

All true. The dems may take the senate. On the other hand it’s looking good that the right may take back the majority in the house. Especially with the cadaver in chief eliminating blue collar jobs by the tens of thousands. When gas hits $5 per gallon (or more) folks are going to sit up and take notice.


----------



## Nick (Nov 21, 2020)

Chiefster23 said:


> All true. The dems may take the senate. On the other hand it's looking good that the right may take back the majority in the house. Especially with the cadaver in chief eliminating blue collar jobs by the tens of thousands. When gas hits $5 per gallon (or more) folks are going to sit up and take notice.


I don't see the Republicans taking back the house. It was a huge shock to the Dems that the Republicans picked up 15 seats in 2020. They thought they would lose 15 seats. Now that they know they can just blatantly rig the elections with the entire world watching without any consequences why would they ever let Republicans have a majority in the house or senate ever again? I believe the Republicans will get the votes by the people, just like they did in Georgia and just like Trump did. But that doesn't seem to matter anymore.


----------



## Pir8fan (Nov 16, 2012)

Saw an article last week that the feds expect this nonsense would generate about $34 billion in revenue. There was no mention of assumed compliance rates. In my area they won't get $34.


----------



## Pir8fan (Nov 16, 2012)

Nick said:


> I don't see the Republicans taking back the house. It was a huge shock to the Dems that the Republicans picked up 15 seats in 2020. They thought they would lose 15 seats. Now that they know they can just blatantly rig the elections with the entire world watching without any consequences why would they ever let Republicans have a majority in the house or senate ever again? I believe the Republicans will get the votes by the people, just like they did in Georgia and just like Trump did. But that doesn't seem to matter anymore.


Agreed. They already proved they can blatantly rig elections so they just move to down ballot races (with the assistance of a packed SCOTUS)


----------



## IS11 (Jan 9, 2021)

Nick said:


> I don't see the Republicans taking back the house. It was a huge shock to the Dems that the Republicans picked up 15 seats in 2020. They thought they would lose 15 seats. Now that they know they can just blatantly rig the elections with the entire world watching without any consequences why would they ever let Republicans have a majority in the house or senate ever again? I believe the Republicans will get the votes by the people, just like they did in Georgia and just like Trump did. But that doesn't seem to matter anymore.


Yep, this is pretty much what will happen from now on. Dems will rig the election and hold power forever. Unless...... use your imagination


----------



## 1skrewsloose (Jun 3, 2013)

I've read a lot of posts on different forums that say the same thing.....we're screwed!, the dems cheated. 

WTF, what do we have to gain by being morally superior and not cheating!! Are we not smart enough to figure out how to?

I say cheat right back at em!! What will the country think when at the next election there are 600 million votes are cast?


----------



## Piratesailor (Nov 9, 2012)

On occasion, while driving in the truck, I get to listen to Rush. I think he was spot on today.

His point was this.... those that think the republicans will sweep the house and senate in 2022, and say let the dems do what they do for 2 years, are delusional. His point was the argument that letting the dems do what they want will turn everyone against them is wrong. He said, correctly, there are millions and millions of people, specifically young, voting for this. Voting for the restriction of 1a and 2a. We overlook that although they cheated and biden didn’t have 80 million votes, he still had millions and millions. Probably equal to Trumps vote count. 

He drove the point home by saying that bringing DC and PR on as states, along with packing the SCOTUS, will ensure that the Republican Party is relegated to the dust bin of history. We will be a one party country where the democrats will not have to ask to do something, they will just do it. 

I think his assessment was correct. 

The damage Biden and his handlers can do in two years is incredible starting with job losses and continuing with our rights. 

And the Republicans and conservatives, following the “rule of law” will take it up the caboose. 

And there ends the story. 

Side comment.. was re-reading 299 days, which is just an ok series, and some of the similarities are striking. Back when it was written, not so much.. but today... striking.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

I heard about 15 minutes of Rush waiting for my income tax appointment.
I heard the same segment, and I too believe he was right on.

All this talk about "we'll get them in the mid-terms" is just fantasy.
The same wishful thinking that was displayed right here last month, giving the election to Trump.


----------



## Prepared One (Nov 5, 2014)

Piratesailor said:


> On occasion, while driving in the truck, I get to listen to Rush. I think he was spot on today.
> 
> His point was this.... those that think the republicans will sweep the house and senate in 2022, and say let the dems do what they do for 2 years, are delusional. His point was the argument that letting the dems do what they want will turn everyone against them is wrong. He said, correctly, there are millions and millions of people, specifically young, voting for this. Voting for the restriction of 1a and 2a. We overlook that although they cheated and biden didn't have 80 million votes, he still had millions and millions. Probably equal to Trumps vote count.
> 
> ...


I heard this as well and he was absolutely spot on. The MSM are trying to convince us that Biden and Harris are moderates and that the numbers in congress may not allow Biden to get much of his agenda through. let's calm the right, let's roll em on their belly's and stroke their stomach. Bull Shit!

While they placate the right they are grabbing more and more power and they now their time is now. Biden is a blathering idiot but Obama ain't. He is pulling the strings and they are going to push the agenda hard with one party control is as the goal. (It always has been) The republicans will be relegated to the trash heap of history before in two years.


----------



## Steve40th (Aug 17, 2016)

I am really getting tired of the narrative, every two years we have elections, we can fix this, send more money..


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

Steve40th said:


> I am really getting tired of the narrative, every two years we have elections, we can fix this, send more money..


Oh, Lord. Now I get emails soliciting from MI, AZ and other places and it's constant. They are computer generated so you can't reply with kiss my butt. You hit unsubscribe and they still come in.


----------



## Steve40th (Aug 17, 2016)

I have Xfinity/COmcast, and I noticed many new emails coming from these solictors for politicians, and were from my email for comcast. One I never use as I use there service to forward emails. I didnt realize I could opt out of something I never opted in.


----------



## bigz1983 (Mar 12, 2017)

I have friends who voted for Biden and they own guns.
When I ask them about how they feel about Biden's $200 gun tax they say "Oh well I'll just pay it I hate Trump so much I don't care"
I have friends that vote 3rd party Libertarian and they believe both parties Dem/Rep want to take away gun rights. 
Well who do they think has been stopping Dems from passing all the extreme gun control bills?
It's been the Republicans..


----------



## Camel923 (Aug 13, 2014)

Buy cosmoline and plastic pvc cap and pipe. Wait...that be banned to.


----------



## Piratesailor (Nov 9, 2012)

Camel923 said:


> Buy cosmoline and cap pipe. What that be banned to.


You read my mind.


----------



## Back Pack Hack (Sep 15, 2016)

The way things are going, most guns won't last long enough to see cosmoline.


----------



## Hemi45 (May 5, 2014)

rice paddy daddy said:


> Hey! My old Garand and SKS don't look so bad now, do they? :vs_laugh:


No doubt! And while I have a couple Glocks, my heart is forever with Colt 1911's and S&W wheel guns.


----------



## MisterMills357 (Apr 15, 2015)

SOCOM42 said:


> Incorporate La Marseillaise
> 
> FRENCH
> 
> ...


She is cute, even with that hair style.





She sounded great.


----------



## Sasquatch (Dec 12, 2014)

TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION!

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Pir8fan (Nov 16, 2012)

RedLion said:


> Biden Proposes $200 Gun Tax and Firearm Buyback Program Along with 13 page Form that Asks for Fingerprints and Photograph


It's estimated that this would generate $34 billion for the federal government. That also assumes a high compliance rate. Good luck with that.


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

Pir8fan said:


> It's estimated that this would generate $34 billion for the federal government. That also assumes a high compliance rate. Good luck with that.


With a nearly $30 trillion deficit, it's not even a drop in the bucket.


----------



## Pir8fan (Nov 16, 2012)

inceptor said:


> With a nearly $30 trillion deficit, it's not even a drop in the bucket.


No it isn't but the left has an insatiable "need" for our money.


----------



## Steve40th (Aug 17, 2016)

Sasquatch said:


> TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION!
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


Damn right. My Legislators, Mace, Graham and Scott. Not a peep when I contacted them
Need to be super voter, so they see I am someone they need to respomd too when I contact about crap like this.


----------

