And that's why Falk's First Law says, "The Whole World Is A Tradeoff."

Which is 'worth more'... the Sometimes or the "Works"? I'm reading the Freakonomics Series... I recommend it to all!

Thwarting availability does sometimes work. The problem is that it stops a lot more rightful (self defense) uses of guns than wrong ones. (I include the large number of cases where a would-be victim reveals that he/she is armed, and the would-be attacker runs away.)

nope;;; drank a lot of lemonade, and now, we've invented
a mix of flat sprite and v8 pomegranate/blueberry. . it's goooooood,
when cold with reverse-osmosis ice!!! -- j
.

Not even a decaf?

we spent a day there in 2009 and still wonder why there is a
Starbucks on every corner. . I haven't had a cup of coffee since
1994 and just can't get it. -- j
.

we will need new taxes for vehicle violence, secondhand
electronic cigarette anxiety and funhouse mirror shock as well.
might we also consider terrorist tax on gasoline from Venezuela? -- j

"This is like taxing all drivers to pay for the death and destruction caused by drunk drivers."

I suspect we already do, through our own auto insurance policies and a lot of other things...

But you're trying to bring logic to an emotion-plagued 'debate.'

Guns are scary. They combine the elements of Surprise and Distance for the user, whether the 'user' is a hunter or a deranged killer.

Virtually all weapons' development since the fist was discovered were 'improvements' to add surprise and distance... rock, sling, slingshot, bow and arrow, crossbow, rifle, six-shooter, semi-automatic weapons and so on. The peak of that 'pyramid' or 'end of that road' is probably nuclear weapons delivered by ICBM.

And nobody ever tries to solve the problem of 'how can you stop a PERSON from USING a gun to kill someone? Thwarting availability doesn't work, but gun-control advocates never stop beating that drum.

I like 'strange' and don't have much use for family values, but otherwise I agree with what you said.

Jan

So just don't register your guns and either buy your ammo outside of their influence or learn to reload. That way their stupid law would be meaningless.

When there's a bombing, we blame the BOMBER.

When there's a drunk-driving accident, we blame the DRIVER.

WHY, when there's a shooting do we blame the GUN?

A Darwin Award gun category in Seattle? If you combine that with other loopy laws and attitudes in this bastion socio-liberal-progressiveness, you'd probably run out of ink, or maybe paper. I stayed there for a week once and thought I'd fallen down a rabbit hole. When I left it took two weeks for my skin pallor to leave.

This is like taxing all drivers to pay for the death and destruction caused by drunk drivers.

Only it's worse than that -- because it may very well increase the problem it purports to solve, by deterring some law-abiding people from buying guns.

One is tempted to evade the tax by buying outside the city and/or on the black market.

Seattle City Council has been taken over by liberal hacks. They think Muslims should get interest free loans, and now this gun and ammo tax. Who in their right mind would go into the City of Seattle to buy arms or ammo anyway?

It interesting how the NRA is suing on this but didn't put in much effort on the state passing a law that you can not touch another persons weapon without a background check and a legal transfer. Seattle likes it too when Bill Gates and Mayor Bloomberg get their dollars behind passing laws here that the majority of the people don't want or don't care about.

Mark my words, if Seattle keeps going this direction with the mayors and City Council people they continue to elect, it will end up like the outskirts of Detroit. It's already pulling in a lot of freaks, like San Francisco and other cities that are going away from family values (human values) that we used to know. It can not get better until we have better leaders, the normal people don't[ have a chance anymore without police and government backing. Currently it seems government is against us, this government of, for, and by, the people? What happened to that?

confiscation of ALL guns.

This is an excellent example of people being forced to fund their oppressors. Just what do you think those "gun safety research and gun violence prevention programs" are going to advocate?

The city of seattle is run by politicians that will stop at nothing to find ways to extract money from the residents of the city or in this case from non-residents who chose to buy fire arms stuff in the city which if suspect none would do if this were enforceable. Insanity permeates the politicians heads.

My guess (unofficial) is that there is more gun violence in the US involving the police shooting it up than people killing each other.

Next it will be a vehicle license tax to offset the financial toll of vehicle accidents.

Why dont they just have a "breathing tax", designed to offset the cost of hiring government workers performing useless and unnecessary tasks.

Maybe they should just take all the money we make and then distribute out living pittances to people based on how little they can live on.

Seattle practicing socialism in action - make the law abiding pay for the miscreants.

No way is this going to affect the criminal element that should be the target of this action... but since it's "too hard" to go after the cause of the problem, let's instead go after those who are not part of the problem.

I wonder if Seattle's dotgov could Darwin itself. Tail wagging the dog mentality. And I thought California was bad...

The gun manufacturers continue to put up with this BS. They should all get together and agree not to sell any guns or ammo to anyone or any organization in the City of Seattle. Including the police. See how well that works.

If it were up to me, I'd be soooooo tempted to allow them to reap the rewards of their stupid policy decisions - to watch as the violence escalates as the law-abiding citizens are stripped of their guns just like in the other liberal cities like Chicago, Baltimore, St. Louis, DC, etc.

But then I look at how it affects me and say, I don't care how stupid these people are, their decisions are going to affect me so I should support the efforts to beat them upside the head with a lawsuit.

That's illegal. They do it, but they don't admit it.

I agree this gun tax is partly by tax-what-you-personally-don't-like. But the rationalization behind it is actually worse. It's insidious. It's the idea that there should be no cost for freedom. I hear people upset that protesters cause normal wear-and-tear on the Capitol and the Square. That wear-and-tear is just a cost of freedom. I'm not sure I believe guns cause a net cost on society, but even if they did, I would not be for penalizing gun owners. You just have to accept some things as part of freedom. No one said freedom is the cheapest course of action. Freedom isn't free.

They already do CG

If they like what you are for you get tax exempt status from the IRS.

If they don't like what you are for, you not only don't get tax exempt status, you get audited instead.

Would they apply the same logic to the First Amendment? Would they tax political protesters for the normal wear and tear they incur to public places and for the financial toll due to increased congestion?

I'm guessing that the Seattle Police Department is going to need an increase in their budget to cover those taxes! It seems to me that nationwide a larger chunk of gun violence seems to be coming from PDs!