View Full Version : Dems: Pay gun owners to hand over assault weapons
It never ends. From The Hill:
Gun owners would receive tax breaks for voluntarily turning in high-powered assault rifles under new legislation proposed Monday.
The Support Assault Firearm Elimination and Education of our (SAFER) Streets Act expected to be reintroduced next week by Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) would provide gun owners with an incentive to turn in their firearms to local police departments.
“Assault weapons are not about hunting, or even self-defense,” DeLauro said. “There is no reason on earth, other than to kill as many people as possible in as short a time as possible, that anyone needs a gun designed for a battlefield.”
Though DeLauro is in favor of stronger guns laws that would completely ban assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition, she emphasized this bill would not force gun owners to turn in their firearms.
The legislation would provide up to $2,000 in tax credits for gun owners who voluntarily hand over assault weapons to their local police departments.
The assault weapons legislation comes in response to the horrific mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., DeLauro’s home state, in December 2012.
DeLauro originally introduced the bill in January 2013, just one month after the Newtown shooting, but the legislation fell short in the Republican-controlled House. She plans to reintroduce it next week when Congress returns from recess.
She said the bill would help “get more assault weapons off the streets."
“Just days after the Newtown tragedy, President Obama asked, ‘Are we doing enough to protect our children?’ And he admitted the answer is, ‘no.’ That must change,” DeLauro said.
DeLauro is announcing the assault weapons legislation this week in conjunction with National Public Health Week.
The co-sponsors include Reps. Betty McCollum (D-Minn.), Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.), Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), and David Cicilline (D-R.I.).
Not that this will pass, but if it did, that would be a sweet return on cheap AR. Buy a Core15 or Del Ton or any other $500 AR you would make $1500 turning it in. The Dems would be subsidizing guns owners! That's some irony for you.
http://thehill.com/regulation/legislation/237983-dems-would-pay-gun-owners-to-turn-in-assault-rifles
Eurodriver
04-06-15, 15:55
Democrats are so incredibly stupid, and so desperate for a gun control win, that they are writing bills that gun owners would actually benefit from.
Where does one even begin to cover the level of fail here? It is a great indicator of just how disconnected may politicians are from both reality in general, and what most voters actually want.
So, I can get a $2,000 tax credit? I can use that to buy two 6920's. Good deal!
Could you turn in just a lower?
What's it take to qualify for the full $2k? Could be a good way to pick up a few bucks for shooting more.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Xparent BlueTapatalk 2
Sometimes the stupid hurts incredibly bad.
How is it we have money for this and how is this a proper function of the Federal Government?
Someone needs to take out a full page ad, in the largest newspaper, in each of the Sponsor & Co-Sponsors States, thanking the voters in those States for their wonderful contribution to our Nation.
The legislation would provide up to $2,000 in tax credits for gun owners who voluntarily hand over assault weapons to their local police departments.
This is a great idea, as my PD would then hand it back to me!
Not that this will pass, but if it did, that would be a sweet return on cheap AR. Buy a Core15 or Del Ton or any other $500 AR you would make $1500 turning it in. The Dems would be subsidizing guns owners! That's some irony for you.
That is not how tax credits work. The $2000 would be a deduction of your income. If you are in the 28% tax bracket (only 5% are), you would save $560. Most folks would see a savings of $400 or less.
Most of us could probably turn our spare parts into a cheap (read <$500.00), no-frills AR, and then turn around and add very little cash for a KAC SR-15. I love it! Joking aside, this bill will not become law.
This is a great idea, as my PD would then hand it back to me!
That is not how tax credits work. The $2000 would be a deduction of your income. If you are in the 28% tax bracket (only 5% are), you would save $560. Most folks would see a savings of $400 or less.
I read tax credit, not deduction...
I read tax credit, not deduction...
If you like your tax credit, you can keep your tax credit.
SilverBullet432
04-06-15, 17:34
Well this is stupid.
Eurodriver
04-06-15, 17:36
I read tax credit, not deduction...
Me too. Deduction = bogus. Credit? Hell yeah, make that shit refundable while you're at it!
I know it says "up to" a $2,000 tax credit.
MountainRaven
04-06-15, 18:01
I wonder if the boost to the economy from increased firearms sales would off-set the revenue lost to the government through this program.
polydeuces
04-06-15, 18:09
Oh the joy.... walking into the local IRS office with some pos AR asking for my $2K credit......
Just the thought makes me all giddy....".....SUM' ONE DUN' TELL ME AH'S GON' GIT 2 LARGE FO' THIS HERE RIG...NOW GIMME MY MONEY BITCHES"..!........
Let's see... Agency self-identifies as a SAFER Site. For a nominal fee, say $50 or so, it accepts an evil assault weapon from citizens, recording owner ID information. Owner claims the tax credit and pockets a few hundred bucks. After the local disposition process, preferably a non-evidentiary "safe keeping" hold, agency turns the gun over to a partner gun shop that is also a SAFER Site. For a nominal fee, say $50 or so, the shop transfers the evil assault weapon to the original surrendering citizen.
Money for the local government.
Money for the citizen.
Money for the shop.
SAFER program bled of money.
Sounds like a plan.
They dropped the ball with the naming of the program. Should have went for gold and made "SAFEST" work... Losers..
Yeah, they dropped the ball on the name for sure. Should have been Silly Twaddle from Unscrupulous Political Idiot Democrats' Act. Or something like that...
walkin' trails
04-06-15, 19:39
Those most likely to commit crimes with so-called assault weapons probably don't file tax returns anyway.
Those most likely to commit crimes with so-called assault weapons probably don't file tax returns anyway.
I doubt that's the point...
FromMyColdDeadHand
04-06-15, 20:49
I just paid my taxes. So they are going to bribe me with my own money?
Wait.....I can go and buy a $400 DPMS, turn it in, get a $2,000 tax credit, and buy a DD rifle and optic...and some beer?
Sounds like a great deal to me.... :jester:
Thank you. It's a credit not a refund which means no one gets anything except for the Dems and the idiots who turn them in.
This is a great idea, as my PD would then hand it back to me!
That is not how tax credits work. The $2000 would be a deduction of your income. If you are in the 28% tax bracket (only 5% are), you would save $560. Most folks would see a savings of $400 or less.
Someone should propose similar legislation providing tax credits to those who promise not to vote. Maybe a free cell phone.
This is a great idea, as my PD would then hand it back to me!
That is not how tax credits work. The $2000 would be a deduction of your income. If you are in the 28% tax bracket (only 5% are), you would save $560. Most folks would see a savings of $400 or less.
Just to clear things up a bit. As described above, you're talking about a tax deduction. From the TurboTax:
What’s the difference between a tax deduction and a tax credit? You might think the two are interchangeable but they aren’t. A tax deduction is something that reduces how much taxable income you claim. A tax credit is something that directly reduces how much tax you owe.
So if you paid $10,000 in federal income tax and actually owed that same about, your return would $0. Now add in a $2,000 tax credit and your tax owed would be reduced to $8,000. As you paid $10,000 but now only owe $8,000, you would get a return of $2,000.
Regardless of whether they use a tax credit or a tax deduction as the incentive, the whole proposal is completely asinine and just illustrates how stupid the sponsors of the bill really are.
Thank you. It's a credit not a refund which means no one gets anything except for the Dems and the idiots who turn them in.
A tax deduction reduces taxable income.
A tax credit reduces, dollar for dollar, your tax liability.
A $2,000 credit is worth $2,000 in your pocket.
A $2,000 deduction is worth a percentage of the $2,000 based on your income tax rate. (At a 25% rate it is worth $500 in your pocket).
http://m.kiplinger.com/article/taxes/T054-C001-S001-tax-credit-vs-deduction.html
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
A tax deduction reduces taxable income.
A tax credit reduces, dollar for dollar, your tax liability.
A $2,000 credit is worth $2,000 in your pocket.
This is true.
Unless you paid less than $2000 in taxes due to no income or a ridiculous amount of credits and/or deductions.
I did a lot of tax returns last year for my base (voluntold to be in charge of the base tax program), and there were a few airmen who with the joint standard deduction of $12k or so and a 6 month deployment, had no taxable income for the entire year.
And here I thought our failing economy was the issue these reps needed to do something about, man good thing we have these people to put it all into perspective.
Let the country sink into a an abyss of spending; as long as we spend some more to get those evil rifles that just up and kill people out of people's hands.
Talk about idiotic.
sevenhelmet
04-07-15, 07:42
The dems have lots of great ideas, don't they? I heard they were going to give our "evil assault rifles" to the "border patrol" to "replace their deadlining equipment". Coming soon to a Mexican drug cartel near you- the rifle you turned in 6 months ago!
From the text of the bill:
‘‘SEC. 25E. ASSAULT WEAPON TURN-IN CREDIT.
4 ‘‘(a) ALLOWANCE OF CREDIT.—
5 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—In the case of an individual
6 who surrenders a specified assault weapon to the
7 United States or a State or local government (or po-
8 litical subdivision thereof) as part of a Federal,
9 State, or local public safety program to reduce the
10 number of privately owned weapons, on the election
11 of the taxpayer there shall be allowed as a credit
12 against the tax imposed by this chapter an amount
13 equal to $2,000.
14 ‘‘(2) YEAR CREDIT ALLOWED.—The amount of
15 the credit under paragraph (1) shall be allowed 1⁄2
16 for the taxable year during which the assault weapon
17 was so surrendered and 1⁄2 in the next taxable year.
It goes on to say that an individual can only take advantage of this tax credit once.
Eurodriver
04-07-15, 08:29
According to that text from the bill itself buying a $600 brand new M&P Sporter and turning it in will result in a $1,000 credit this year and $1,000 credit next year.
How is it we have money for this and how is this a proper function of the Federal Government?
Someone needs to take out a full page ad, in the largest newspaper, in each of the Sponsor & Co-Sponsors States, thanking the voters in those States for their wonderful contribution to our Nation.
To answer your first question.. We don't and it isn't...
Someone should propose similar legislation providing tax credits to those who promise not to vote. Maybe a free cell phone.
You know, I could see this working..
FromMyColdDeadHand
04-07-15, 09:14
I'm going to an accounting forum and start a thread about guns....
Don't the credits start to phase out or the AMT come into play at some point?
Eurodriver
04-07-15, 10:01
I'm going to an accounting forum and start a thread about guns....
Don't the credits start to phase out or the AMT come into play at some point?
Credits phase out based on AGI and other factors vary among each individual credit. I didn't see anything in the bill that limited this credit to specific income levels.
I don't know why we are spending so much time talking about this. Has this even been brought up in a committee yet?
I'll say!
Besides allowing the $40 "receiver" of evil weapons to count for the $2000 tax credit, the bill goes on and on editorializing about how assault weapons have no sporting purpose.
http://delauro.house.gov/images/pdf/SAFERStreetsAct114th.pdf
Democrats are so incredibly stupid, and so desperate for a gun control win, that they are writing bills that gun owners would actually benefit from.
sevenhelmet
04-07-15, 10:15
16 and a firearm shall not be determined to
17 be particularly suitable for sporting purposes
18 solely because the firearm is suitable for use in
19 a sporting event
Wait... what? So if it's used at a sporting event that's not a sporting purpose? I guess my baseball bat isn't for sporting purposes then either. :rolleyes:
File this with the shoelaces and empty air = machine guns "braintrust" of the dumbocrats.
The definitions at the end are actually hilarious.
These would not pass for fifth grade work; i.e. using a term to define itself.
Some gems:
The term ‘threaded barrel’ means a feature or characteristic that is designed in such a manner to allow for the attachment of a firearm as defined in section 5845(a) of the National Firearms Act
The term ‘pistol grip’ means a grip, a thumbhole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip.
Where does one even begin to cover the level of fail here? It is a great indicator of just how disconnected may politicians are from both reality in general, and what most voters actually want.
You nailed it! Very well said.
Further evidence that liberalism is a diagnosable mental disorder.
I just read the entire thing and I love how it is targeting ONLY the legal weapons out there. So they want to ONLY take the legal assault rifles off the streets...... I wonder what agenda that plays into?........ :secret:
No thanks. We don't need another Cash for Clunkers v2.0
Every turned in firearm, even if it is turned into two more firearm purchases... is yet another data point they can use in the complicit media to puke their emotional justifications.
Lets see, the least expensive way to milk this stupidity for all its worth is to a.) know a lot of people you can trust, that can qualify b.) have them buy a receiver and c.) Pocket a portion of the credit for turning them onto the program.
‘‘(J) A frame or receiver that is identical to, or based substantially on the frame or receiver of, a firearm described in any of subparagraphs (A) through (I) or (L).
Of course, the text of the bill goes on to read that any of the following will also qualify:
‘‘(G) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds. Or "a semiautomatic shotgun that will hold more than 5 rounds."
If I didn't already have my deductions, I could see turning in a shitload of Hi Point carbines.
16 and a firearm shall not be determined to
17 be particularly suitable for sporting purposes
18 solely because the firearm is suitable for use in
19 a sporting event
Wait... what? So if it's used at a sporting event that's not a sporting purpose? I guess my baseball bat isn't for sporting purposes then either. :rolleyes:
File this with the shoelaces and empty air = machine guns "braintrust" of the dumbocrats.
That is actually the ATF definition within the 1968 GCA. And yes, it's retarded.
The definitions at the end are actually hilarious.
These would not pass for fifth grade work; i.e. using a term to define itself.
Some gems:
The term ‘threaded barrel’ means a feature or characteristic that is designed in such a manner to allow for the attachment of a firearm as defined in section 5845(a) of the National Firearms Act
The term ‘pistol grip’ means a grip, a thumbhole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip.
Again, using actual ATF definitions. Suppressors, and flash hiders which are deemed suppressors) are considered "firearms" by themselves according to the ATF.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.