Seattle judge rules that firearms deals should pay for crimes committed with weapons they sold

[Little-Acorn]

The liberals have found yet another excuse for transferring wealth (even a little). A judge in Seattle has ruled that gun dealers may have to pay for crimes others commit, using a weapon the dealer sold.

Soon the judge will probably rule that Ford and Chevrolet must pay for people who drive their cars and run over pedestrians or commit hit-and-run crashes.

Lakeisha Holloway might get a break after running down thirty-plus people on the Las Vegas strip, killing one, if she can successfully pretend that the manufacturer of her car was partly to blame.

The liberals' solution to this is, of course, to raise taxes yet again.

Half the price of a gun is taxes already. Now Seattle will raise taxes on them even more, and put a tax on ammunition as well. Apparently ammunition makers are also being blamed somehow.

None of this will prevent crimes, of course. But the liberals are happy to raise taxes, even for useless programs and purposes, to punish those who haven't done anything wrong.

Only in America.

------------------------------------------

http://news.yahoo.com/judge-rules-gun-dealers-may-214422044.html

Judge Rules Gun Dealers May Have to Pay For Crimes Committed With Weapons They Sell

By Marie Solis
December 23, 2015 4:44 PM

Seattle will be ringing in 2016 with new gun control legislation.

On Tuesday, King County Superior Court Judge Palmer Robinson ruled that a new tax on guns and ammo would go into effect on Jan. 1, in a case gun rights activists brought against the city. Robinson's decision aligned with City Council's unanimous vote in August, approving a tariff of $25 per gun and 2 or 5 cents per round of ammunition for sellers.

In the eyes of NRA members — the plaintiffs, alongside the Second Amendment Foundation and the National Shooting Sports Foundation — Robinson's ruling flouted the law. But during the case's hearing, a lawyer defending the city testified that the levy is perfectly kosher. The key is the difference between taxation and regulation, the Seattle Times reported.

Attorney William Abrams stated, "Taxation is to raise revenue, and cities have broad powers to raise revenue through a variety of taxes."

This simple fact doesn't mean the NRA will stand down. "This is not the final word," NRA spokesperson Lars Dalseide said in a statement to the Examiner. "We will keep fighting until all legal avenues are exhausted and the people of Seattle are free to exercise their Second Amendment rights without persecution from their elected officials."

 

[Iceweasel]

I don't think it's that sinister. I think the judge is just underdeveloped mentally like all the other liberals. They blame the gun so the person that sold it is evil and should pay. Any firearm dealer in Seattle these days gets what they deserve.

 

[Little-Acorn]

I don't think it's that sinister. I think the judge is just underdeveloped mentally like all the other liberals. They blame the gun so the person that sold it is evil and should pay. Any firearm dealer in Seattle these days gets what they deserve.

Every time a dealer sells a firearm to a guy, they must first call the Fed Govt who does a background check (NICS check). The govt issues a "Yes" or "No" on whether the guy is allowed to buy a gun.

So, shouldn't the Fed govt be as liable as the dealer was? If not more so?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The liberals have found yet another excuse for transferring wealth (even a little). A judge in Seattle has ruled that gun dealers may have to pay for crimes others commit, using a weapon the dealer sold.

Soon the judge will probably rule that Ford and Chevrolet must pay for people who drive their cars and run over pedestrians or commit hit-and-run crashes.

Lakeisha Holloway might get a break after running down thirty-plus people on the Las Vegas strip, killing one, if she can successfully pretend that the manufacturer of her car was partly to blame.

The liberals' solution to this is, of course, to raise taxes yet again.

Half the price of a gun is taxes already. Now Seattle will raise taxes on them even more, and put a tax on ammunition as well. Apparently ammunition makers are also being blamed somehow.

None of this will prevent crimes, of course. But the liberals are happy to raise taxes, even for useless programs and purposes, to punish those who haven't done anything wrong.

Only in America.

------------------------------------------

Judge Rules Gun Dealers May Have to Pay For Crimes Committed With Weapons They Sell

Judge Rules Gun Dealers May Have to Pay For Crimes Committed With Weapons They Sell

By Marie Solis
December 23, 2015 4:44 PM

Seattle will be ringing in 2016 with new gun control legislation.

On Tuesday, King County Superior Court Judge Palmer Robinson ruled that a new tax on guns and ammo would go into effect on Jan. 1, in a case gun rights activists brought against the city. Robinson's decision aligned with City Council's unanimous vote in August, approving a tariff of $25 per gun and 2 or 5 cents per round of ammunition for sellers.

In the eyes of NRA members — the plaintiffs, alongside the Second Amendment Foundation and the National Shooting Sports Foundation — Robinson's ruling flouted the law. But during the case's hearing, a lawyer defending the city testified that the levy is perfectly kosher. The key is the difference between taxation and regulation, the Seattle Times reported.

Attorney William Abrams stated, "Taxation is to raise revenue, and cities have broad powers to raise revenue through a variety of taxes."

This simple fact doesn't mean the NRA will stand down. "This is not the final word," NRA spokesperson Lars Dalseide said in a statement to the Examiner. "We will keep fighting until all legal avenues are exhausted and the people of Seattle are free to exercise their Second Amendment rights without persecution from their elected officials."

lol

The ruling has nothing to do with 'liberals.'

 

[Iceweasel]

I don't think it's that sinister. I think the judge is just underdeveloped mentally like all the other liberals. They blame the gun so the person that sold it is evil and should pay. Any firearm dealer in Seattle these days gets what they deserve.

Every time a dealer sells a firearm to a guy, they must first call the Fed Govt who does a background check (NICS check). The govt issues a "Yes" or "No" on whether the guy is allowed to buy a gun.

So, shouldn't the Fed govt be as liable as the dealer was? If not more so?

The dealer is supposed to look into his soul and see the potential evil. That's why they go to Gun Violence Recognition Academy.

 

[Iceweasel]

The ruling has nothing to do with 'liberals.'

It has everything to do with them. Normal people don't think that way.

 

[The Rabbi]

The ruling has nothing to do with 'liberals.'

It has everything to do with them. Normal people don't think that way.

Even normal lawyers dont think that way. There is no other area where legal responsibility is imposed like that.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I don't think it's that sinister. I think the judge is just underdeveloped mentally like all the other liberals. They blame the gun so the person that sold it is evil and should pay. Any firearm dealer in Seattle these days gets what they deserve.

Every time a dealer sells a firearm to a guy, they must first call the Fed Govt who does a background check (NICS check). The govt issues a "Yes" or "No" on whether the guy is allowed to buy a gun.

So, shouldn't the Fed govt be as liable as the dealer was? If not more so?

You're as ignorant as you are ridiculous and wrong.

Obviously you didn't bother to read the ruling:

"The guns and ammunition may never be used, may be used only at a range, or may be used exclusively for safe and legal purposes. Accordingly, the fee imposed is a tax rather than a regulation."

Gun-tax-ruling

The ordinance authorizes an excise tax pursuant to Washington state law; it does not seek to 'regulate,' its intent is not 'punitive,' and it does not burden the conduct of firearms dealers in any manner – again, having nothing to do with 'liberals.'

Because the ordinance is not regulatory your comparison to the NICS fails as a fallacy, one having nothing to do with the other.

 

[S.J.]

It'll be overturned.

 

[Little-Acorn]

How much money will the govt take from firearms dealers, before it's finally overturned?

Will they have to pay it back?

(snicker)

 

[Little-Acorn]

So, when will they start penalizing Ford, Chevrolet, and Toyota for crimes committed by people who run over pedestrians with their cars?

That makes just as much sense.

 

[Rustic]

The liberals have found yet another excuse for transferring wealth (even a little). A judge in Seattle has ruled that gun dealers may have to pay for crimes others commit, using a weapon the dealer sold.

Soon the judge will probably rule that Ford and Chevrolet must pay for people who drive their cars and run over pedestrians or commit hit-and-run crashes.

Lakeisha Holloway might get a break after running down thirty-plus people on the Las Vegas strip, killing one, if she can successfully pretend that the manufacturer of her car was partly to blame.

The liberals' solution to this is, of course, to raise taxes yet again.

Half the price of a gun is taxes already. Now Seattle will raise taxes on them even more, and put a tax on ammunition as well. Apparently ammunition makers are also being blamed somehow.

None of this will prevent crimes, of course. But the liberals are happy to raise taxes, even for useless programs and purposes, to punish those who haven't done anything wrong.

Only in America.

------------------------------------------

Judge Rules Gun Dealers May Have to Pay For Crimes Committed With Weapons They Sell

Judge Rules Gun Dealers May Have to Pay For Crimes Committed With Weapons They Sell

By Marie Solis
December 23, 2015 4:44 PM

Seattle will be ringing in 2016 with new gun control legislation.

On Tuesday, King County Superior Court Judge Palmer Robinson ruled that a new tax on guns and ammo would go into effect on Jan. 1, in a case gun rights activists brought against the city. Robinson's decision aligned with City Council's unanimous vote in August, approving a tariff of $25 per gun and 2 or 5 cents per round of ammunition for sellers.

In the eyes of NRA members — the plaintiffs, alongside the Second Amendment Foundation and the National Shooting Sports Foundation — Robinson's ruling flouted the law. But during the case's hearing, a lawyer defending the city testified that the levy is perfectly kosher. The key is the difference between taxation and regulation, the Seattle Times reported.

Attorney William Abrams stated, "Taxation is to raise revenue, and cities have broad powers to raise revenue through a variety of taxes."

This simple fact doesn't mean the NRA will stand down. "This is not the final word," NRA spokesperson Lars Dalseide said in a statement to the Examiner. "We will keep fighting until all legal avenues are exhausted and the people of Seattle are free to exercise their Second Amendment rights without persecution from their elected officials."

The judge is a piece of shit, judges like are the reason why there Is violence in urban areas. Only a dumbass would think more laws will help with violent crimes. These power-hungry pieces of shit like this judge are the reason why we have so many career politicians in power.
Progressives are clueless

 

[Obiwan]

But the judge DOES open up an interesting can of worms...

Can we "tax" the Democrats to pay for any damages Obozo's "refugees" cause our country through terrorists attacks??? Including damages to any victims' families???

Or how about damages for Bill Clinton allowing the "Boston Bombers" or 9/11 highjackers in (including the costs of the war in Afghanistan that resulted from 9/11)???

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Taxing a RIGHT is illegal and unconstitutional as so ruled by the Supreme Court. No poll tax means no ammo tax or firearms tax solely on firearms and ammo. It is an infringement of the right and the Supreme Court so ruled in regards to voting which is not even a listed right in the Constitution.

 

[Little-Acorn]

So this judge feels that firearms dealers should pay a penalty when a criminal uses the gun they sold him, in a crime.

If a store gets robbed, and the storeowner pulls out a gun and hold the robber at gunpoint until the cops come and take him away, will this judge pay the gun shop a reward, that sold the store owner his gun?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Seattle judge rules that firearms deals should pay for crimes committed with weapons they sold"

And this is a blatant lie – most on the right are as dishonest as they are stupid.

 

[Dana7360]

The liberals have found yet another excuse for transferring wealth (even a little). A judge in Seattle has ruled that gun dealers may have to pay for crimes others commit, using a weapon the dealer sold.

Soon the judge will probably rule that Ford and Chevrolet must pay for people who drive their cars and run over pedestrians or commit hit-and-run crashes.

Lakeisha Holloway might get a break after running down thirty-plus people on the Las Vegas strip, killing one, if she can successfully pretend that the manufacturer of her car was partly to blame.

The liberals' solution to this is, of course, to raise taxes yet again.

Half the price of a gun is taxes already. Now Seattle will raise taxes on them even more, and put a tax on ammunition as well. Apparently ammunition makers are also being blamed somehow.

None of this will prevent crimes, of course. But the liberals are happy to raise taxes, even for useless programs and purposes, to punish those who haven't done anything wrong.

Only in America.

------------------------------------------

Judge Rules Gun Dealers May Have to Pay For Crimes Committed With Weapons They Sell

Judge Rules Gun Dealers May Have to Pay For Crimes Committed With Weapons They Sell

By Marie Solis
December 23, 2015 4:44 PM

Seattle will be ringing in 2016 with new gun control legislation.

On Tuesday, King County Superior Court Judge Palmer Robinson ruled that a new tax on guns and ammo would go into effect on Jan. 1, in a case gun rights activists brought against the city. Robinson's decision aligned with City Council's unanimous vote in August, approving a tariff of $25 per gun and 2 or 5 cents per round of ammunition for sellers.

In the eyes of NRA members — the plaintiffs, alongside the Second Amendment Foundation and the National Shooting Sports Foundation — Robinson's ruling flouted the law. But during the case's hearing, a lawyer defending the city testified that the levy is perfectly kosher. The key is the difference between taxation and regulation, the Seattle Times reported.

Attorney William Abrams stated, "Taxation is to raise revenue, and cities have broad powers to raise revenue through a variety of taxes."

This simple fact doesn't mean the NRA will stand down. "This is not the final word," NRA spokesperson Lars Dalseide said in a statement to the Examiner. "We will keep fighting until all legal avenues are exhausted and the people of Seattle are free to exercise their Second Amendment rights without persecution from their elected officials."

You need to learn the whole situation.

That tax is to pay for the cost of the damage the guns have done to people.

All that expense isn't free. The taxpayers of the city have to pay for it.

Why should the taxpayers of the state and city pay for the damage done by guns? Why shouldn't those who buy & sell guns & ammunition pay for it?

That tax isn't meant to prevent any crime. It's meant to pay for the results of crime which I believe is a great idea. The taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for it. The gun crazy people should. If you want a gun then pay for the damage the guns cause.

I also believe that people who own guns should have insurance to pay for the damage they do with that gun. If you put someone in the hospital or kill them, the insurance will pay for what you have done instead of the taxpayers of the state or city.

By the way, I was born and raised in Seattle. I've lived in the Seattle area all my life. I'm among the majority here who supports this tax.

 

[2aguy]

The liberals have found yet another excuse for transferring wealth (even a little). A judge in Seattle has ruled that gun dealers may have to pay for crimes others commit, using a weapon the dealer sold.

Soon the judge will probably rule that Ford and Chevrolet must pay for people who drive their cars and run over pedestrians or commit hit-and-run crashes.

Lakeisha Holloway might get a break after running down thirty-plus people on the Las Vegas strip, killing one, if she can successfully pretend that the manufacturer of her car was partly to blame.

The liberals' solution to this is, of course, to raise taxes yet again.

Half the price of a gun is taxes already. Now Seattle will raise taxes on them even more, and put a tax on ammunition as well. Apparently ammunition makers are also being blamed somehow.

None of this will prevent crimes, of course. But the liberals are happy to raise taxes, even for useless programs and purposes, to punish those who haven't done anything wrong.

Only in America.

------------------------------------------

Judge Rules Gun Dealers May Have to Pay For Crimes Committed With Weapons They Sell

Judge Rules Gun Dealers May Have to Pay For Crimes Committed With Weapons They Sell

By Marie Solis
December 23, 2015 4:44 PM

Seattle will be ringing in 2016 with new gun control legislation.

On Tuesday, King County Superior Court Judge Palmer Robinson ruled that a new tax on guns and ammo would go into effect on Jan. 1, in a case gun rights activists brought against the city. Robinson's decision aligned with City Council's unanimous vote in August, approving a tariff of $25 per gun and 2 or 5 cents per round of ammunition for sellers.

In the eyes of NRA members — the plaintiffs, alongside the Second Amendment Foundation and the National Shooting Sports Foundation — Robinson's ruling flouted the law. But during the case's hearing, a lawyer defending the city testified that the levy is perfectly kosher. The key is the difference between taxation and regulation, the Seattle Times reported.

Attorney William Abrams stated, "Taxation is to raise revenue, and cities have broad powers to raise revenue through a variety of taxes."

This simple fact doesn't mean the NRA will stand down. "This is not the final word," NRA spokesperson Lars Dalseide said in a statement to the Examiner. "We will keep fighting until all legal avenues are exhausted and the people of Seattle are free to exercise their Second Amendment rights without persecution from their elected officials."

You need to learn the whole situation.

That tax is to pay for the cost of the damage the guns have done to people.

All that expense isn't free. The taxpayers of the city have to pay for it.

Why should the taxpayers of the state and city pay for the damage done by guns? Why shouldn't those who buy & sell guns & ammunition pay for it?

That tax isn't meant to prevent any crime. It's meant to pay for the results of crime which I believe is a great idea. The taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for it. The gun crazy people should. If you want a gun then pay for the damage the guns cause.

I also believe that people who own guns should have insurance to pay for the damage they do with that gun. If you put someone in the hospital or kill them, the insurance will pay for what you have done instead of the taxpayers of the state or city.

By the way, I was born and raised in Seattle. I've lived in the Seattle area all my life. I'm among the majority here who supports this tax.

The damage isn't by guns...it is by criminals. What you are doing is taxing law abiding gun owners, the ones not shooting people or using their guns to commit crime to pay for the crimes of the guilty, the ones who do use their guns to commit crime and murder people....where is the sense in that?

in this country there are 357 million guns in private hands and only 8,124 gun murders...so you are saying that it is fair for the owners of 356,991,876 guns to pay for the criminals who use guns to murder 8,124 people.....even those 356,991,876 guns were never used to commit murder......

You guys don't care about crime, or criminals....you can see in your posts you just hate the people who own guns. The real problem for you guys, those gun owners do not commit crimes with their guns...ever...so you can't punish them. By taxing their ammo.....you get a little feeling of lashing out at them for the sin of owning a gun......you are pretty pathetic.

 

[2aguy]

The liberals have found yet another excuse for transferring wealth (even a little). A judge in Seattle has ruled that gun dealers may have to pay for crimes others commit, using a weapon the dealer sold.

Soon the judge will probably rule that Ford and Chevrolet must pay for people who drive their cars and run over pedestrians or commit hit-and-run crashes.

Lakeisha Holloway might get a break after running down thirty-plus people on the Las Vegas strip, killing one, if she can successfully pretend that the manufacturer of her car was partly to blame.

The liberals' solution to this is, of course, to raise taxes yet again.

Half the price of a gun is taxes already. Now Seattle will raise taxes on them even more, and put a tax on ammunition as well. Apparently ammunition makers are also being blamed somehow.

None of this will prevent crimes, of course. But the liberals are happy to raise taxes, even for useless programs and purposes, to punish those who haven't done anything wrong.

Only in America.

------------------------------------------

Judge Rules Gun Dealers May Have to Pay For Crimes Committed With Weapons They Sell

Judge Rules Gun Dealers May Have to Pay For Crimes Committed With Weapons They Sell

By Marie Solis
December 23, 2015 4:44 PM

Seattle will be ringing in 2016 with new gun control legislation.

On Tuesday, King County Superior Court Judge Palmer Robinson ruled that a new tax on guns and ammo would go into effect on Jan. 1, in a case gun rights activists brought against the city. Robinson's decision aligned with City Council's unanimous vote in August, approving a tariff of $25 per gun and 2 or 5 cents per round of ammunition for sellers.

In the eyes of NRA members — the plaintiffs, alongside the Second Amendment Foundation and the National Shooting Sports Foundation — Robinson's ruling flouted the law. But during the case's hearing, a lawyer defending the city testified that the levy is perfectly kosher. The key is the difference between taxation and regulation, the Seattle Times reported.

Attorney William Abrams stated, "Taxation is to raise revenue, and cities have broad powers to raise revenue through a variety of taxes."

This simple fact doesn't mean the NRA will stand down. "This is not the final word," NRA spokesperson Lars Dalseide said in a statement to the Examiner. "We will keep fighting until all legal avenues are exhausted and the people of Seattle are free to exercise their Second Amendment rights without persecution from their elected officials."

You need to learn the whole situation.

That tax is to pay for the cost of the damage the guns have done to people.

All that expense isn't free. The taxpayers of the city have to pay for it.

Why should the taxpayers of the state and city pay for the damage done by guns? Why shouldn't those who buy & sell guns & ammunition pay for it?

That tax isn't meant to prevent any crime. It's meant to pay for the results of crime which I believe is a great idea. The taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for it. The gun crazy people should. If you want a gun then pay for the damage the guns cause.

I also believe that people who own guns should have insurance to pay for the damage they do with that gun. If you put someone in the hospital or kill them, the insurance will pay for what you have done instead of the taxpayers of the state or city.

By the way, I was born and raised in Seattle. I've lived in the Seattle area all my life. I'm among the majority here who supports this tax.

Why shouldn't those who buy & sell guns & ammunition pay for it?

Welllll....because they committed no crime...how about that? They are innocent, and never harmed anyone...how about that?

The guns used by the criminals are illegal, those criminals cannot own or carry guns since the majority of the 8,124 gun murders committed in this country are committed by career criminals murdering other career criminals.....

The taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for it.

Only someone from Washington would say this.....the only ones paying for it are the tax paying gun owners who have not used their guns to harm anyone and have not used their guns to commit any crime. You are punishing innocent people for crimes they did not commit.

That is perfect liberal logic.....

 

[saveliberty]

This is why there is an appeals process in this country.