Dem’s new ammo tax to result in more deaths?

By Brent Smith

Don’t ever let anyone convince you that all Democrats are complete fiscal or economic ignoramuses. It may just seem that way listening to the new darling of the radical left, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

For sure, there appear to be some economic principles that just escape them, like the impact of Medicare-for-All, but at least some Democrats understand basic tax policy and the effects of taxation. At least some understand that if you want more of something, tax it less, and if you want less, tax it more.

Take, for example, Connecticut Democratic state Rep. Jillian Gilchrest’s new ammunition tax proposal. She wants to increase the state ammunition tax to 50 percent. Currently, ammo is taxed at the same rate as every other consumer good, and that just won’t do.

Jillian understands full well that a huge tax increase on ammunition will cause people to buy less, which to the anti-gun left is a win for “safety.”

But is it a win for safety?

Everyone knows that the only way to get good at doing anything is to practice. Repetition is the key. Whether it’s giving a speech, hitting a golf ball or shooting a gun, one can never achieve and maintain proficiency without constant practice.

And a lack of proficiency can prove deadly, sometimes metaphorically – sometimes literally.

If you set out to make a living through giving speeches, you had better practice regularly. Not one will pay money to hear a speech given by someone who stumbles about the stage, fumbling for the right words, and can’t form a cogent thought. In short order, your speaking career will die.

But not all practice is the same. It’s a lot easier and a heck of a lot cheaper to practice shooting a basketball than to become proficient at shooting a weapon.

The worst that can happen by not becoming proficient at shooting a basketball is that you lose a game. If you are not proficient at handling and firing a weapon, you may lose your life.

Sure, there are ways to keep the cost of weapon proficiency down. Dry fire drills are great and don’t require any live ammunition. They help with weapon handling, drawing the weapon from various positions, both moving and stationary. They help with proper grip and muscle memory, trigger pull, etc.

However, there is only so much one can do short of live fire practice – actually shooting your weapon. There is no substitute for it.

Most experts agree that to maintain proficiency requires live fire drill sets about twice a week and shooting no more than 50 rounds each practice session.

To some, that may not sound like much until you begin to add it up – 100 rounds of ammo per week for, say, 49 weeks a year, allowing for taking a few weeks off. That’s almost 5,000 rounds per year spent just on practice.

You may spend maybe $15 to $20 for a box of 50 target rounds. Averaged out to $17.50/box times 100 boxes = $1,750 per year on practice ammo alone. Then add a 50 percent tax onto that and you’re now having to spend $2,625 just maintain your proficiency, speed and accuracy.

But why is being proficient with your weapon so important?

One has to assume that most people buy a weapon, most likely a handgun, for self/home defense. If, God forbid, you ever have to draw your weapon to defend yourself or others, you had better know how to use it properly and hit what you’re aiming at. Without constant practice, and under stressful conditions, you may make a deadly mistake and shoot an innocent or get yourself killed.

This 50 percent tax proposal will directly affect the safety of many law-abiding shooters who may no longer be able to afford the live fire practice that’s essential to handle high stress situations. This legislation may very well get more people killed.

Leave a Comment