As every good Boy Scout knows, it’s good to be prepared. Know thy enemy. As such, it’s always good to remember the viewpoint(s) from which the government (all of them, federal, state and local) operates. Its world view. How it looks at things. One of its main precepts is, no matter how big the deficit or how close we get to the fiscal precipice, the problem isn’t too much spending, it’s not enough revenue. That’s right, America, you’re just not paying enough taxes. What’s the latest brainstorm from the Administration for raising more tax dollars? It’s called the vehicle miles traveled tax (VMT) and it’s a scheme for taxing drivers based on the miles they drive. Yes, this has something to do with guns . . . .
You may not know it, but you’re already paying 10 percent on handguns and 11 percent on ammo to your favorite Uncle Sammy. Just like we’re already paying taxes on gas. Now I’m not saying Uncle Sam’s going to propose putting a tracking device on every heater in the land. Not that they wouldn’t love to. But given the fiscal state of affairs, lots of constituencies are going to have to bite the bullet. So to speak.
Well except for the unions, obviously. And environmentalists and companies that make stuff that the environmentalists love, even though they’re not profitable without Uncle Sam’s help (i.e. your tax money). But companies that “hurt” the environment? Easy pickens.
OK, gun owners aren’t that easy, given that the NRA’s stalking the halls of power. But they have a soft underside: lead. Lead poisoning. Lead poisoning from billions of bullets just . . . left there. In the wild. Working its way up the food chain. It’s a deadly problem. Allegedly.
We’ve already seen environmentalists attempt to ban lead ammo outright. The NRA et al. beat that one back. But what the Obama administration can’t achieve through legislation, it attacks by regulation (e.g. their ongoing attempts to create a long gun registry by executive fiat for 6,500 southern gun dealers). So . . . what about a lead ammo tax?
During the lead ammo battle, defenders of the ban claimed that a lead ammo prohibition wouldn’t effect federal tax revenues, earmarked for conservation. As the feds seek to twist the screws on taxpayers, rather than cut themselves down to size, they’re going to figure out that they could simply ADD tax to lead ammo to save the bald eagle.
Of course, they could always tear down the ring fence preventing some of the money from being used for “deficit reduction.” Who could be against that?