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

[Ray From Cleveland]

Why do they have more responsibility than you? Why not car dealers, since many criminals move around by car? How about sneaker makers, since they all wear sneakers. How about hoodie manufacturers, since they often wear hoodies? Or handkerchief makers since they are often used for gang signs.
It is yet another attempt to "stick it" to gun owners as a politically unpopular group. And of course it wont do anything.

Unlike the people who buy sneakers or automobiles, 80% of the people who buy gun do so for protection; that is shooting people if they see fit. Since you usually can't defray the cost of medical care for victims of gunshots to the shooters, we are defraying those costs to those that made the shooting possible, the gun industry. It's a similar situation with the tax on cigarettes. We tax cigarettes to pay for research, educate people on dangers of smoking and to help victims of cigarette smoke. Unfortunately for the cigarette manufactures they didn't have the NRA on their side so their industry got stuck with the tax.

Bull. They tax cigarettes to control people, that's all. Remember who really runs this country: Insurance companies.

Speaking of which, a shooter is liable for damages or deaths he or she may have caused. A victim can sue you for compensation via payroll garnishments, property such as an automobiles or house, and if the shooting took place on your property, even the insurance company.

You're not likely to collect anything from most shooters. After paying legal fees most of them would have little or nothing left. Those that get convicted will be earning less than a buck a day in prison. Most of those that get released won't have jobs to pay their legal bills much less jury award.

Gun owners come from all classes of life from the rich to the poor. Even Donald Trump carries his gun (so he says) from time to time.

So who would pay for me if I'm attacked and I can no longer defend myself because they stripped my right of firearm ownership? I could lose weeks or months from work or even permanent disability.

A criminal likely has no assets. A criminals likely doesn't legally own a firearm. A criminal likely doesn't have any cash. A criminal sure as hell wouldn't have insurance even if it was the law.

So we go back to the gun manufacturers. Do you suppose they can afford these lawsuits or the massive costs it would take for them to defend the company from lawsuits? Of course not, they would go out of business, and the liberals would have found a way around the Constitution and our rights. After all, there are thousands of people that get shot every single year. And you can't remove suicide victims from the batch because their family would be able to sue the gun manufacturers and sellers.

It's a backdoor liberal concept to try and disarm the American public. But let a Republican try something like that saying it will be legal to sue abortion clinics if the patient realizes she made a mistake by having an abortion, and then wants compensation. Or that we need to have a federal tax on abortions of $400.00. Then the liberals would be up in arms (no pun intended).

It would seem to me that putting a fee on the gun industry to help pay medical expenses would help defray law suits because the victims would not be able to collect damages for those medical costs. In Washington state their is no fees charged for purchasing guns other than carry and conceal permits. I doubt these fees will have any real impact on the sale of guns or taxes I pay.

In this country, lawsuits are permitted when a person or organization did something harmful to other people(s). Manufacturing guns is not harmful to people. The buyers know the dangers of guns, they know the responsibility of owning a gun, and they accept the legal consequences if they do something illegal with their gun. So how did gun manufacturers or gun sellers become responsible for what other people do with the guns they bought from them?

Gun control is people control, and that's what this is really all about. Sue the gun dealers and they will be forced out of business. Abortions kill people, so why not have a tax on abortion clinics say $500.00? See how much of our tax dollars go to Planned Parenthood? Why should we be giving them money. Tax abortions and they can support themselves.

 

[g5000]

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.

Ford, Chevrolet, and Toyota have been penalized for automotive deaths. Did you not know this?

Does "unsafe at any speed" ring a bell? It launched at least one guy's career.

They are forced by regulations to put seat belts and many other safety devices in their cars. This costs them money, and has resulted in safer cars, thus less deaths.

They did not do this voluntarily.

They are also forced to regulate the emissions of their cars.

So there you go. Your argument collapses.

 

[g5000]

The gun tax is a Pigovian tax, just like the cigarette tax.

The odds of a smoker getting cancer and becoming a huge burden to the taxpayer is much greater than the odds of a non-smoker. So all smokers have to pay an extra tax as their share of their increased risk to society.

Just so with gun buyers now in Seattle. Every gun owner is a greater risk than a non gun owner and so they must pay their share of their increased risk.

 

[The Rabbi]

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.

Ford, Chevrolet, and Toyota have been penalized for automotive deaths. Did you not know this?

Does "unsafe at any speed" ring a bell? It launched at least one guy's career.

They are forced by regulations to put seat belts and many other safety devices in their cars. This costs them money, and has resulted in safer cars, thus less deaths.

They did not do this voluntarily.

They are also forced to regulate the emissions of their cars.

So there you go. Your argument collapses.

You are an idiot. Like that's news. Those car makers were sued because they sold an unsafe product that did not perform as advertised. Guns do perform as advertised. If they dont the makers can still be sued.

 

[The Rabbi]

The gun tax is a Pigovian tax, just like the cigarette tax.

The odds of a smoker getting cancer and becoming a huge burden to the taxpayer is much greater than the odds of a non-smoker. So all smokers have to pay an extra tax as their share of their increased risk to society.

Just so with gun buyers now in Seattle. Every gun owner is a greater risk than a non gun owner and so they must pay their share of their increased risk.

Bullshit.
Smokers cost less money than non smokers because they die younger and their illnesses are shorter lived. Cigarette taxes are sin taxes.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The gun tax is a Pigovian tax, just like the cigarette tax.

The odds of a smoker getting cancer and becoming a huge burden to the taxpayer is much greater than the odds of a non-smoker. So all smokers have to pay an extra tax as their share of their increased risk to society.

Just so with gun buyers now in Seattle. Every gun owner is a greater risk than a non gun owner and so they must pay their share of their increased risk.

So when is government going to give cigarette smokers some money back since many of them die before or during their early use of Social Security and Medicare?

 

[g5000]

The gun tax is a Pigovian tax, just like the cigarette tax.

The odds of a smoker getting cancer and becoming a huge burden to the taxpayer is much greater than the odds of a non-smoker. So all smokers have to pay an extra tax as their share of their increased risk to society.

Just so with gun buyers now in Seattle. Every gun owner is a greater risk than a non gun owner and so they must pay their share of their increased risk.

So when is government going to give cigarette smokers some money back since many of them die before or during their early use of Social Security and Medicare?

They will give the money back at the same time a private health insurance company gives money back to someone who never gets sick.

That's the nature of insurance.

Next!

 

[g5000]

The gun tax is a Pigovian tax, just like the cigarette tax.

The odds of a smoker getting cancer and becoming a huge burden to the taxpayer is much greater than the odds of a non-smoker. So all smokers have to pay an extra tax as their share of their increased risk to society.

Just so with gun buyers now in Seattle. Every gun owner is a greater risk than a non gun owner and so they must pay their share of their increased risk.

Bullshit.
Smokers cost less money than non smokers because they die younger and their illnesses are shorter lived. Cigarette taxes are sin taxes.

Only the Rabbi could spin longer life spans as a bad thing.

It's usually liberals who do. Overpopulation, blah blah blah.

The sin taxes are win/win/win from the liberal viewpoint. They either achieve more revenue, or they save lives, or they run the evil cigarette and gun dealers out of business.

 

[Dana7360]

OK, someone explain it to me.

It appears to be a tax on guns at 25 dollars/gun. And a few cents per round. While I don't like taxes it is what government does to raise revenue. Since guns sales are sky rocketing it seems like the natural target for a tax increase. So the judge, in my opinion, ruled properly, although I don't like putting anymore taxes on the people.

The legitimacy of a tax is not based on an items popularity. That would be a form of price gouging, good grief.

The hell it ain't. What world do you live in? They tax the crap out of cigarettes on the premise of health concerns then make MJ legal so they can tax that also. Wouldn't make much sense to tax something unpopular.

You're wrong about the marijuana.

No politician has the guts to write a law that legalizes marijuana for all adults. Then get it passed in a state congress and had it signed into law.

It's been done by the petition and ballot initiative process.

It's the PEOPLE of a handful of states that have legalized marijuana and taxed it. Not politicians.

So it's the PEOPLE who want it and have absolutely no problem with paying the tax.

If you don't want to pay the tax it's easy not to. Don't buy any.

 

[g5000]

If you don't want to pay the tax it's easy not to. Don't buy any.

And you don't see the gigantic, profound flaw in this kind of nanny state thinking?

 

[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.

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.

It doesn't matter what you think or want.

What you want means nothing to those who pass those laws and our judicial system.

You posting on a message board will change nothing. The judge who ruled in this case could careless what you think and want. That judge doesn't even know you exist and if you voiced your opinion to that judge you would probably be laughed out the court.

I get it, you need a gun to compensate for other short comings you have. That's fine. Those who buy guns and ammunition in Seattle will be paying more in taxes for it.

It costs money to compensate for your short comings. Countless people dead and countless more injured.

Stop trying to pass off the expense of those crimes on those of us who want nothing to do with guns and don't have to compensate for any short comings.

You may not live in Seattle but I do and I know that a majority of people support this tax. So be happy that you get to live and buy guns the way you want to. We who live in Seattle want to live the way we choose and we choose to make those who buy/sell guns and ammunition to pay a tax that will pay expenses of the results of those guns.

I believe you right wingers call it "states rights." I guess that only applies to what you want and not to what other people want no matter if you live in that area or not.

Don't like it? Then don't come to Seattle. You're not welcome here.

A foolish tax... So called gun violence is an nonissue.

Gun violence isn't a so called issue.

If it was I wouldn't have seen so many threads from conservatives/republicans about the gun violence in Chicago.

Gun violence is an issue just not with gun nuts like you.

I agree with the majority of my fellow residents of Seattle, It's a great tax. It's about time that those who cause all that extra expense to have to help pay for it.

 

[Dana7360]

If you don't want to pay the tax it's easy not to. Don't buy any.

And you don't see the gigantic, profound flaw in this kind of nanny state thinking?

I have absolutely no problem with taxes imposed on the sales of marijuana.

I signed the petitions and voted for the legalization of marijuana in my state. I voted with the majority and we've had legal recreational marijuana for those 21 years old and older since 2012.

Just as I have no problem with the taxes on alcohol and cigarettes.

People are free to avoid the taxes if they don't want to pay it. Just don't buy the products.

It's as easy as that.

 

[g5000]

If you don't want to pay the tax it's easy not to. Don't buy any.

And you don't see the gigantic, profound flaw in this kind of nanny state thinking?

I have absolutely no problem with taxes imposed on the sales of marijuana.

I signed the petitions and voted for the legalization of marijuana in my state. I voted with the majority and we've had legal recreational marijuana for those 21 years old and older since 2012.

Just as I have no problem with the taxes on alcohol and cigarettes.

People are free to avoid the taxes if they don't want to pay it. Just don't buy the products.

It's as easy as that.

Wow. So you don't see the flaw.

First and foremost, it is government behavioral control. Think of the implications of that.

Second, what happens when the next Republican government decides porn and Rated M video games and any sites which have naughty words are bad for you and those things should be taxed into oblivion?

 

[regent]

Eventually gun manufactures will bear the responsibility for any harm the products they manufacture create. When that time comes the manufacturers will put so many restrictions on sales that it will be a different world.

 

[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."

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.

It doesn't matter what you think or want.

What you want means nothing to those who pass those laws and our judicial system.

You posting on a message board will change nothing. The judge who ruled in this case could careless what you think and want. That judge doesn't even know you exist and if you voiced your opinion to that judge you would probably be laughed out the court.

I get it, you need a gun to compensate for other short comings you have. That's fine. Those who buy guns and ammunition in Seattle will be paying more in taxes for it.

It costs money to compensate for your short comings. Countless people dead and countless more injured.

Stop trying to pass off the expense of those crimes on those of us who want nothing to do with guns and don't have to compensate for any short comings.

You may not live in Seattle but I do and I know that a majority of people support this tax. So be happy that you get to live and buy guns the way you want to. We who live in Seattle want to live the way we choose and we choose to make those who buy/sell guns and ammunition to pay a tax that will pay expenses of the results of those guns.

I believe you right wingers call it "states rights." I guess that only applies to what you want and not to what other people want no matter if you live in that area or not.

Don't like it? Then don't come to Seattle. You're not welcome here.

A foolish tax... So called gun violence is an nonissue.

Gun violence isn't a so called issue.

If it was I wouldn't have seen so many threads from conservatives/republicans about the gun violence in Chicago.

Gun violence is an issue just not with gun nuts like you.

I agree with the majority of my fellow residents of Seattle, It's a great tax. It's about time that those who cause all that extra expense to have to help pay for it.

Your weakness is obvious, Taxs help no one but career politicians and their puppet masters.
We have a violence problem, it has nothing to do with guns.

 

[whitehall]

Shouldn't car dealerships be responsible for DUI's and hit and runs committed with the cars they sold?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Eventually gun manufactures will bear the responsibility for any harm the products they manufacture create. When that time comes the manufacturers will put so many restrictions on sales that it will be a different world.

No, they would sooner move the hell out of there to a more gun friendly environment. Moving out with them will be the jobs and taxes they used to pay. Then people who want guns will have to travel farther to obtain them or simply order them over the internet where they pay no state tax either.

 

[2aguy]

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.

Ford, Chevrolet, and Toyota have been penalized for automotive deaths. Did you not know this?

Does "unsafe at any speed" ring a bell? It launched at least one guy's career.

They are forced by regulations to put seat belts and many other safety devices in their cars. This costs them money, and has resulted in safer cars, thus less deaths.

They did not do this voluntarily.

They are also forced to regulate the emissions of their cars.

So there you go. Your argument collapses.

Not for the normal use of their vehicles and never for drunks who use their vehicles illegally. guns are also highly regulated, as much as cars......your argument is stupid.

 

[2aguy]

The gun tax is a Pigovian tax, just like the cigarette tax.

The odds of a smoker getting cancer and becoming a huge burden to the taxpayer is much greater than the odds of a non-smoker. So all smokers have to pay an extra tax as their share of their increased risk to society.

Just so with gun buyers now in Seattle. Every gun owner is a greater risk than a non gun owner and so they must pay their share of their increased risk.

wrong....criminals are a greater risk and they steal the guns or get straw buyers......

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

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.

It doesn't matter what you think or want.

What you want means nothing to those who pass those laws and our judicial system.

You posting on a message board will change nothing. The judge who ruled in this case could careless what you think and want. That judge doesn't even know you exist and if you voiced your opinion to that judge you would probably be laughed out the court.

I get it, you need a gun to compensate for other short comings you have. That's fine. Those who buy guns and ammunition in Seattle will be paying more in taxes for it.

It costs money to compensate for your short comings. Countless people dead and countless more injured.

Stop trying to pass off the expense of those crimes on those of us who want nothing to do with guns and don't have to compensate for any short comings.

You may not live in Seattle but I do and I know that a majority of people support this tax. So be happy that you get to live and buy guns the way you want to. We who live in Seattle want to live the way we choose and we choose to make those who buy/sell guns and ammunition to pay a tax that will pay expenses of the results of those guns.

I believe you right wingers call it "states rights." I guess that only applies to what you want and not to what other people want no matter if you live in that area or not.

Don't like it? Then don't come to Seattle. You're not welcome here.

A foolish tax... So called gun violence is an nonissue.

Gun violence isn't a so called issue.

If it was I wouldn't have seen so many threads from conservatives/republicans about the gun violence in Chicago.

Gun violence is an issue just not with gun nuts like you.

I agree with the majority of my fellow residents of Seattle, It's a great tax. It's about time that those who cause all that extra expense to have to help pay for it.

The only people that cause "all the extra expense" are criminals--not gun sellers or manufacturers. So go tax the criminals instead.