New Connecticut Bill would Add a 50% Tax to Ammunition

New Connecticut Bill would Add a 50% Tax to Ammunition
New Connecticut Bill would Add a 50% Tax to Ammunition

Hartford, CT-(Ammoland.com)- Connecticut state representative Jillian Gilchrest is proposing a 50% “sin tax” on ammunition.

House Bill (HB) 5700 has been introduced to the Connecticut State House of Representatives. State Senator Will Haskell has introduced a companion bill in the Connecticut State Senate.

In a Twitter post, Gilchrest said she is getting push back on the bill about the need to protect one’s home. She asked, “how much ammunition does someone really need to do that?”

What responsible gun owners would tell the Freshmen Democrat is that it takes a lot. It isn’t just about the rounds that someone defends their homes has in their gun. It takes a lot of practice with a firearm to use it correctly in a defensive situation. Gun owners would argue by restricting ammunition that you make a dangerous situation even more dangerous.

In the video, Gilchrest says she views guns as a health issue. She states that she thinks that this tax would cut down on gun owners just as taxes on cigarettes cut down on smokers.

This bill will run into some serious Constitutional issues. These taxes are more akin to Poll Taxes than taxes on cigarettes. Voting is a right. Smoking is not.

The Supreme Court of The United States has ruled multiple times that a tax cannot specifically target a right with a tax. A sales tax is okay since it is on all items, but courts could see a tax that only applies to ammunition as unconstitutional.

In Murdock v. Pennsylvania SCOTUS ruled that the state could not put a license tax on a solicitor. A Jehovah’s Witness filed the case. He was asking contributions in exchange for books and pamphlets. The state argued that he was selling these items.

SCOTUS ruled that the Jehovah’s Witness was exercising his freedom of religion. The court ruled that the state could not specifically target his right with a tax.

Cox v. New Hampshire is another case where SCOTUS ruled that the state cannot use a tax to target a specific right. Gun advocates will surely sue because a tax on ammunition specifically targets a right.

The Connecticut Democrats will most likely cite the tax paid to the government for items that fall under the National Firearms Act of 1934. SCOTUS is currently considering taking up Kettler vs. The United States of America. Jeremy Kettler is petitioning the court claiming that the NFA tax is a targeted tax against his right to bear arms.

Another Constitutional hurdle the proposed law could be the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

In Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections SCOTUS eliminated the poll tax because of how it adversely black and poor white voter compare to their wealthy counterparts. This new tax will hit the poor harder than the rich.

Willes K. Lee, President of the National Federation of Republican Assemblies and NRA Board Member, agrees with this assessment of the proposed law.

“Gilcrest & Haskill are so naive and new to political office that they don’t know our public sees through their elitist hypocrisy,” said Lee. “They view firearms ownership and the right to defend oneself to be a privilege for only the rich who can afford yet another regressive tax.”

“Their bills target the most vulnerable, those law-abiding citizens who have the right to defend themselves and their families, who can least afford their privileged tax hike. They know that criminals steal their ammo, so their tax doesn’t stop crime or terrorism. These bills are racist in nature and their motives for introducing these companion bills should be challenged.”

The House referred HB 5700 to Joint Committee on Finance, Revenue and Bonding.


About John CrumpJohn Crump

John is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. He is the former CEO of Veritas Firearms, LLC and is the co-host of The Patriot News Podcast which can be found at www.blogtalkradio.com/patriotnews. John has written extensively on the patriot movement including 3%’ers, Oath Keepers, and Militias. In addition to the Patriot movement, John has written about firearms, interviewed people of all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and is currently working on a book on leftist deplatforming methods and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss, on Facebook at realjohncrump, or at www.crumpy.com.

31 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Brett

you can’t fix stupid … but you CAN vote it out of office ….

tracy

Does this law prohibit people driving to Massachusetts and New York to buy ammunition?

PMinFl

If they cannot tax a right….well…..just eliminate that right! We’re talking Connecticut here. Glad I left As for traveling to neighboring states, they’re just as bad; and travel a little farther and Ct has revenuers who report your license plate for a bounty NH liquor anyone? Just let them go broke.

Joe

No matter what the goobermint says, if it is illegal to tax the first amendment, ie. papers and such, it is unconstitutional to tax martial supplies. This includes any type of excise, sales, at permission tax, etc. To tax is to regulate and control, the 2af strictly forbids this. But please master, may I have more NRA supported punishment for exercising my God given rights. Same goes for registration.

Tuck you fax!

Laddyboy

These PAID SERVANTS in “congress” need to rethink what bills they are putting into the pots of their states. They TOOK AN OATH of OFFICE which states that they will SUPPORT and DEFEND the Constitution against all enemies, both Foreign AND DOMESTIC. When these SERVANTS try to pass a law that is AGAINST the Constitution, they should be called onto the “red carpet” for SUBVERSION of the Constitution. SUBVERSION IS a PUNISHABLE OFFENCE when committed against America. These government PAID SERVANTS should be RECALLED, ARRESTED, CHARGED and PROSECUTED. Or they should be BANISHED for trying to commit OVER-REACH of their… Read more »

tomcat

So what is to stop Ct. citizens from going to another state and buy their ammo. I didn’t see any limits you were allowed to have. Ignorance abounds in all government positions.

Chris Howard

This is one of the next idiotic dreams to fight the wrong problem, again !! They will never stop shooters or criminals with any of these bills ! The Government is becoming more stupid each day it opens it’s piehol ?!!

Edmund

First, they can order their ammo online and circumvent sales tax entirely (unless CT already made that illegal). Second, if that comes to pass, maybe the NRA can set up a “charity” site to provide free ammo to people in totalitarian states? Third, CT is really small. The entire population is an hour or less from another state. Simply buy elsewhere then drive home and pay CT NO sales tax. Lastly, maybe they can just buy cheaper from “reloaders,” in, and out of state. Sure, that may be illegal, but the creation of black market sales is built upon gov’t… Read more »

Crazy1

What does Democrat and Sin Tax have in common. These idiots have a one track mind. I wonder what she intends to do with this revenue? Provide health insurance for all the illegal immigrants in the country. Just like the idiots wanting to tell you you can only buy 20 rounds of ammo a month, or quarter . When will they tell you you can only buy a gallon of milk a month. We can ban the sale of cigarettes but we can legalize marijuana and opoids. Well consider this, 20 a month is 240 a year times 10 years… Read more »

rich z

I hear NEW YORK STATE is looking at 20 rounds every 3 months.. Better save the brass and buy lots of powder.