Ammo For Sale

« « where Great Britain used to be | Home | Tactical Furniture » »

Blatant dumbassery

They dropped a bullet tax. But the tax on guns to defray healthcare costs stays. These people are morons. And what exactly is a ” high rate of gun”?

10 Responses to “Blatant dumbassery”

  1. Jerry Says:

    More than say, two?

  2. nk Says:

    I don’t know if the police store still sells guns but if it does, it is the only gun store in Chicago. The best, including the range I was going to, are in nearby Cook County suburbs. A lot of cops shop there, plus hunters and fishermen. I’m thinking that this is designed to drive them out of business.

  3. Bryan S. Says:

    To be fair, the high rate of crime caused by the high rate of gun is most likely actual defensive use or carrying for the purpose of defense. Just because they make a right a crime, doent make all the crime bad.

    All it does is pad their numbers.

  4. nk Says:

    This is Roaring ’20s once more, Bryan. Gang wars, drivebyes. None of them get their guns legally. They get them on the street or from their girlfriends/sisters/mothers who do not have a criminal record and can have a FOID.

  5. nk Says:

    I meant Roaring ’20s *in Chicago*.

  6. Mike Says:

    Bwahahahahaha! We all better hope Romney and Reps win AND repeal O-Care, ’cause this is just the beginning.

    The CDC is working over-time to tie guns to health care expenditures. These politicians are also tying guns to health care costs. Ergo, gun ownership/use is a “public health issue”.

    Under O-Care, the Sec of HHS is empowered to develop and implement regulations related to “the public health”, “community public health”, and “health and well-being”. When gun violence becomes firmly entrenched as a “public health epidemic”, the jig will be up.

    Don’t be surprised if 10/15/20 years down the line, it becomes a requirement to certify that you do not own any firearms under an expanded O-Care regulatory regime. You will presented with a clear choice: keep your guns, and you and your family get kicked off the insurance rolls; or keep your insurance, but get rid of your guns.

    They won’t even need to send a SWAT team to your house to get your guns; the vast majority of gun owners will give them up voluntarily, in order to have some health insurance.

  7. David Says:

    I don’t have a sarcasm font on my computer – so just pretend –

    But, but, I don’t understand.

    1. Chicago doesn’t allow gun ownership so there couldn’t possibly be true that “guns are the sources of the incredible violence we have in our neighborhoods.”

    2. “…29 percent of guns used in crimes in Chicago…” can’t possibly be true – how can there be guns used in crimes when Chicago doesn’t allow guns?

    3. “670 victims of gun violence” must be a mistake. You can’t have ‘victims of gun violence’ when no one living there is allowed to own guns.

    But for some good news – they said one absolutely true thing in this article – “…to impose a tax as a form of gun control…” at least they were honest here – none of that ‘its for the kids’ or other BS that they usually try to credit tax increases to…


    1. guns aren’t the source of the violence in your neighborhoods – your neighbors are the source of the violence in your neighborhoods. Try controling the criminals, not the tools they prefer to use when committing violent acts against their neighbors.

    2. 29% of the guns used in crimes were purchased LEGALLY by people who could pass a federal background check, but then drove home and used that gun to commit a crime? Seriously? How effed up do you think the federal background check system is?

    3. How much did you spend treating everyone who was not suffering a gun shot wound. I bet there were a lot more than just 670 of them. A quick online check of the 39 hospitals in Chicago showed over 369,000 discharged patients last year, and only 670 of them were gun related? For those of you who are bad at math – that is about 0.18%. Maybe you should be finding out what they other 368000+ people were suffering from and start taxing the source of their misery to raising money.

  8. rickn8or Says:

    How different is it “…to impose a tax as a form of gun control…” than “…to impose a tax as a form of VITE control…”??

  9. Grayson Says:

    It’s Chicago.
    Let them rot in their own corruption.

  10. jeffersonian Says:

    They should put a tax on politicians to help defray the costs of stupid.