Skip to comments.Program guaranteed to reduce gun crime: tax credit or voucher for new gun safe purchases
Posted on 01/07/2013 7:15:36 PM PST by BushMeister
Governments subsidize the behavior they want to see more of, and punish behavior they want to curtail. If liberals want to see people locking up their guns, then they should favor subsidizing this behavior.
I'm providing the link for a gun safe comparison website, in case anyone wants to use it do come up with other ideas.
(Excerpt) Read more at gun-safes.findthebest.com ...
The amount of the tax credit could be based on the cost of the particular safe. For instance, a Cabelas safe that costs $1,200 would be eligible for a tax credit of $500. A $500 gun safe could be eligible for a $200 tax credit. Obviously, it would be ideal to have all homes supplied with a gun safe of at least a certain quality, but the economics will limit what many individuals can afford, even with a credit or voucher. Yes, even a dirt cheap Stack-On gun safe might prevent gun theft or illicit usage, but insisting on a certain minimal quality safe might be a good idea. Testing could be performed on different models of gun safes, with those meeting minimal standards being eligible for a subsidy.
When we consider how much money was wasted in all these stimulus plans for almost no real return, a goal of subsidizing the sale of 1 million gun safes over two years would be realistic, cost only about $300 million, and would place hundreds of thousands of gun safes in homes that would otherwise not have them. Its hard to imagine anyone actually believing that this would not prevent the theft of thousands of guns annually, or that many acts of gun violence due to unintended access wouldnt be prevented.
Would the left object to subsidizing gun ownership? Of course. But this plan addresses the reality of 200 million+ guns in America, which are not going away. This is the kind of sensible program that the Republicans can put forward to show that they are living in the real world, and want to partake in trying to reduce gun crime. If the Dems object, it will provide another bit of evidence that they are not primarily concerned with reducing gun crime, but with reducing firearms ownership.
It was tried in Canada, and then abandoned.
Criminals will always find a way to have a gun. Why impose on the honest law abiding people?
“Idots?” What are you trying to say?
Sorry, I misunderstood. Not sure if you’re saying that a gun registry was tried in Canada, or that it was mandatory to lock up firearms at home. I’m not saying to mandate anything, just to offer a subsidy for buying a new gun safe.
I want less government “help”, not more.
No Federal subsidy is “sensible”.
Well.... I “do” need a larger gun safe, lol. :)
This is a good idea. Even if it doesn’t pass, attaching such a tax credit to upcoming gun-control legislation could be an effective poison pill.
Better to keep the government out of it. Sooner or later, everything they touch goes bad.
Like it or not, the Gov't is going to spend billions in subsidies each year. It might as well spend money on something that would actually make sense. And it does make sense, as it would prevent thousands of firearms thefts annually, and many unauthorized usages.
Bad idea. If you bought a safe, you’d have to report it on your income tax because you got a subsidy and they would then know you have at least one gun in your house or you would not have bought the safe. Or, the selling store would have to send a list to the government of those who bought a safe with the subsidy.
That would be the main reason for not doing that, however, I wouldn’t lock up my guns. Might as well drop dead now than have the bad guy kill me cause I couldn’t get the safe opened soon enough.
How about this, do away with the ban on fully auto and let Americans buy them at the same price the USG does.
No tax dollars required.
It’s not really even a subsidy. There should be NO tax on firearms or ammunition, no more than there should be a poll tax. Voting is a right , firearm ownership is a right and certainly ammunition is covered by the the Second Amendment, if it weren’t it would say we had the right to keep and bear blue steel and walnut clubs. In these days and times the No tax should be extended to gun safes for home and auto.
You’re part of the problem. A huge part.
Yeah...go ahead...take that deduction on your GOVERNMENT tax returns.
Then they’ll know EXACTLY who to visit first when the GOVERNMENT starts confiscating guns.
Nothing would have to be reported if ther was no tax on an item for anyone and the government is not involved. No federal, state or local tax on firearms, ammunition, reloading supplies or gunsafes. Owning firearms is a right and it’s none of the governments business unless someone has done something to lose that right.
ALABAMA 35 NOTRE DAME 0 mid 3rd quarter
ROLL TIDE GO BAMA GO SEC
“They” need to get the shrink industry to cough up the names of the truly troubled.
For those labeled, they would have the right to challenge the diagnosis.
80% of these mass killers have been on psychotropic drugs.
I have more than one firearm and sometimes I’m not home and it’s prudent to keep the others locked in a safe. I have more than I can use at one time and some of them have specific uses so it may depend on what I’m doing or where I’m going as to which and or how many firearms I take with me.
I'd be in favor of this -- as for the gov't "knowing" -- there are somewhere between 200 million and 400 million firearms in the USA. If Obama declares himself President For Life, he can just start a house-to-house search at #1 on any street and keep going. In 1000 years, they might manage to find a lot of them.
“Nothing would have to be reported if ther was no tax on an item for anyone and the government is not involved.”
If the government is giving a subsidy using any method, they are involved and they will know who got the subsidy.
It just so happened, I “had” to buy a car (too much money to fix the one I had and it was 16 years old) during the cash for clunkers program and that car fit that profile, so I used that. There was a raft of federal government papers to fill out and these papers went to the federal government. It will be the same with a subsidy for a safe - they will know you got that safe and know you have guns.
I can see a reason for a safe if you have many guns and keep one or two ready to use outside the safe. However, the government will know you have that safe.
The number of guns stolen annually is estimated at about 225,000 in the WSJ article linked below, although I have seen much higher estimates. It would be nice to see that figure reduced, but I admit that involving the Fed has a number of drawbacks.
Here's a stat from the WSJ article that troubles me: in 1993, 54% of households said they owned guns, while that figure is only 41% as of 2010. Urban dwellers, immigrants, liberals coming of age and starting their own families, etc. are part of that erosion. I'd love to see any policies that could be a part of reversing that trend.
The subsidy would be blind, NO TAX on gun safes. In my mind it wouldn’t be a subsidy at all, NO polltax, NO tax on firearms ammunition or gunsafes. just like a cash sale now on ammunition only NO TAX. The biggest flaw in this is that it makes too much sense and it is too simple. We could complicate it by limiting the NO TAX to American made products but trade agreements in place wouldn’t allow that.
Unless I filled my subsidized safe with gold and silver.
Would that be fraud to use my gooberment-subsidized gun safe for precious metals, important documents and family photos? lol
You are being naive - there is no way the feds would help people buy a safe and not know who got those safes. They would have a way to know who had guns and they would never pass up a chance of being able to know that.
“Here’s a stat from the WSJ article that troubles me: in 1993, 54% of households said they owned guns, while that figure is only 41% as of 2010. Urban dwellers, immigrants, liberals coming of age and starting their own families, etc. are part of that erosion. I’d love to see any policies that could be a part of reversing that trend”
Gun safety taught in schools would go a long way towards reversing that, especially if it involved actual firing of guns and shooting competition. I do realize what the chances are of that happening.
“Would that be fraud to use my gooberment-subsidized gun safe for precious metals, important documents and family photos? lol”
You only got that subsidized safe because you had to sign it was for guns and that’s the problem. If they take our guns, they show up at your door because you signed you have guns to put in that safe. If you don’t have guns, they definitely would slap you in jail for fraud AFTER they tore your house up looking for guns.
Some of the posters on this thread do not understand the US Attorney General Eric Holder hates your guts and wants every gun owner separated from his guns if it takes killing him to do it - they will say you resisted so they had to snuff you out. Think Waco and Ruby Ridge.
I make the joke. My point was that every gooberment-subsidized program is rife with fraud. SS, Medicare and Medicade have up to 45% fraudulent claims and the majority are never caught.
How many of the “gun crimes” in the past several years would have been prevented by this program?
None that I am aware of.
I only own one gun, I have a place to keep it already, I call it a night stand.
Washington State exempts gun safes from sales tax - about 8.33%, BUT you have to fill out a form that it is a gun safe so they know you have guns.
Best to buy one in Oregon - no sales tax - if you are near the border.
Just what I want...a free & registered Gubmint Gun Safe that they can haul away when confiscation commences!
“I gots me mah free obama gun safe!”
so the left could look at tax returns and look to see who owns such a safe?
So INvoluntary bankruptcies can be forced on people and their tax returns examined and firearms taken?
so the left could look at tax returns and look to see who owns such a safe?