Taxing guns for their costs, but not subsidizing them for their benefits

So how about if they also subsidize gun owners for the benefits that they create? I don't mind if they tax if they also recognize the benefits because on net they will be subsidizing the purchase of guns.

Now one lawmaker in Illinois wants to mandate gun owners in the Land of Lincoln purchase a million dollar liability insurance policy each year in order to keep their guns.

Representative Kenneth Dunkin proposed Illinois House Bill 0687 in early February.

He says the money collected would keep taxpayers from footing hospital or funeral expenses for people killed by gun violence.

"There is a cost associated with loss of life through one's negligence," said Dunkin. "This is closing an economic gap so you the taxpayer won't have to continue to pay." . . . .



Blogger cmblake6 said...

I shout an obscenity in the general direction of said Dunkin.

3/07/2009 10:32 AM  
Blogger Chas said...

There is a benefit to society associated with resistance to crime and preservation of life through self-defense. Successful instances of self-defense should be rewarded as the benefit to society that they are.
Of course, shooting Marxist/warrior/hero/criminals would be politically incorrect from the Marxist perspective, since such criminals work to destroy capitalism and bring down America, so no rewards, only penalties, for those who defend themselves and capitalist America. From the Marxist perspective, private gun ownership is a cost without benefit.

3/08/2009 12:02 PM  
Blogger TYF said...

John, didn't you publish some research showing more kids drown in 5 gal. plastic buckets than are accidentially shot each year?

Perhaps Dunkin should start by requiring a million dollar insurance policy if you own a plastic bucket...

3/08/2009 5:37 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home