11% tax where are we at in the lawsuit?

[ZeroFoxGiven]

It’s California. Disregarding The Constitution is common place in the PRK.

You think there would be fast track for constructional challenges

 

[skb720]

I'm guessing the State has a strong defense using the federal Pittman-Robertson hunting excise tax as precedent. That is probably the reason Michel is instructing the plaintiffs to withdraw this for now. The State also has their "ace-in-the-hole" that they control and manipulate the 9th En-Banc panel in their favor. Until there are significant changes to the 9th Circuit judges, the State will get away with anything.

 

[SLORNR]

5, 10, 15 years from now?

Californians have been dealing with unconstitutional gun laws for decades.

Decades from now, Californians will still be dealing with them.

 

[SLORNR]

You think there would be fast track for constructional challenges

That’s a good one.

 

[SLORNR]

I'm guessing the State has a strong defense using the federal Pittman-Robertson hunting excise tax as precedent. That is probably the reason Michel is instructing the plaintiffs to withdraw this for now. The State also has their "ace-in-the-hole" that they control and manipulate the 9th En-Banc panel in their favor. Until there are significant changes to the 9th Circuit judges, the State will get away with anything.

Agreed. Though the 2A has nothing to do with hunting, so I don’t believe it would be a logical or sound precedent.

The 9th circuit would disagree with my take I’m sure. Anti 2A supporters perpetually make the argument that one doesn’t needs X amount of rounds or type of weapon to hunt a Y. As illogical as that so called “argument” is, it is still being spouted with regularity to this day.

 

[1911-CV]

I'm guessing the State has a strong defense using the federal Pittman-Robertson hunting excise tax as precedent. That is probably the reason Michel is instructing the plaintiffs to withdraw this for now. The State also has their "ace-in-the-hole" that they control and manipulate the 9th En-Banc panel in their favor. Until there are significant changes to the 9th Circuit judges, the State will get away with anything.

Michel says exactly why they are withdrawing the current lawsuit; they need to exhaust the administrative remedies before the court will hear the suit. Nothing to do with Pittman-Robertson.

It's a delay tactic by the state (Franchise Tax Board will respond that they are administering the tax in accordance with the statute), but one that worked.

 

[GoldensRule]

I just don’t understand how you could blatantly disregard the Constitution and “Tax” a right. Maybe I’m naive.

If the government can tax your income, property and things you buy, they can tax anything. The excise tax on firearms doesn't prevent you from keeping or bearing arms. Make a valid case against that and you could also apply that to regular sales tax on firearms.

 

[SLORNR]

If the government can tax your income, property and things you buy, they can tax anything. The excise tax on firearms doesn't prevent you from keeping or bearing arms. Make a valid case against that and you could also apply that to regular sales tax on firearms.

Very true.

It really is an ideological and cultural battle more than a legal one. California gun owners will never sway the anti 2A ideologues. Look at states with a pro gun culture such as AZ, FL, TX, KY, TN, IN and so forth. The only way to effect change is via a cultural and ideological shift. I don’t see it in CA, at least not in the numbers necessary to 180 on the current path.

 

[1911-CV]

If the government can tax your income, property and things you buy, they can tax anything. The excise tax on firearms doesn't prevent you from keeping or bearing arms. Make a valid case against that and you could also apply that to regular sales tax on firearms.

I think it will come down to whether the court finds the tax so unreasonable as to infringe on the right. If the tax was 10000% such that only the very rich could afford guns and ammo, it would be a slam dunk case....

 

[Hit Factor]

If the government can tax your income, property and things you buy, they can tax anything. The excise tax on firearms doesn't prevent you from keeping or bearing arms. Make a valid case against that and you could also apply that to regular sales tax on firearms.

That’s what they said about poll taxes.

 

[SLORNR]

I think it will come down to whether the court finds the tax so unreasonable as to infringe on the right. If the tax was 10000% such that only the very rich could afford guns and ammo, it would be a slam dunk case....

That’s the envelope the anti 2A ideologues are going to push it too.

 

[SLORNR]

That’s what they said about poll taxes.

Unlike a poll tax Californians can simply choose not to pay by acquiring their firearms via PPT.

At least that is how our enemies will argue it. They are fairly predictable at this point.

 

[Hit Factor]

Unlike a poll tax Californians can simply choose not to pay by acquiring their firearms via PPT.

At least that is how our enemies will argue it. They are fairly predictable at this point.

The 2nd Amendment doesn’t only apply to used guns.

 

[GoldensRule]

That’s what they said about poll taxes.

Poll taxes are illegal. 24th amendment 1964, voting rights act 1965, etc. Sales and excise taxes are legal. Would love it if sales and excise taxes were illegal, I'll be dead, buried and turned to dust before that happens.

 

[GoldensRule]

I think it will come down to whether the court finds the tax so unreasonable as to infringe on the right. If the tax was 10000% such that only the very rich could afford guns and ammo, it would be a slam dunk case....

Every sales and excise tax is already regressive. Make your case and you could possibly destroy every sales and excise tax in the nation. I'm rooting for you!

 

[SLORNR]

The 2nd Amendment doesn’t only apply to used guns.

I didn’t say that it did.

I’m simply stating what an anti 2A body will counter with.

The 2A doesn’t only apply to muskets either, it applies to weapons that have magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, flash hiders, and pistol grips with collapsing butt stocks. And yet here we are in California, decades later.

 

[SLORNR]

Poll taxes are illegal. 24th amendment 1964, voting rights act 1965, etc. Sales and excise taxes are legal. Would love it if sales and excise taxes were illegal, I'll be dead, buried and turned to dust before that happens.

Humanity will not exist the day that happens.

 

[lopez1171]

I was going to have some ammo shipped into my local lgs. They said they charge the 11% on top of sales tax

 

[SLORNR]

I was going to have some ammo shipped into my local lgs. They said they charge the 11% on top of sales tax

It is the unfortunate reality of living in California.

The border states bulk ammo sales are going to sky rocket as a result. I’m sure vendors in Phoenix and Las Vegas will happily take our $.

 

[treelogger]

It is the unfortunate reality of living in California.

The border states bulk ammo sales are going to sky rocket as a result. I’m sure vendors in Phoenix and Las Vegas will happily take our $.

And with a FFL03 + CoE one can bring ammo into the state legally. In case you're wondering, an F250 or Ram 2500 can handle about 2000 lbs of ammo going over the Siskiyou Mountains from Medford.