Tuesday, February 12, 2013

Stupid question

Okay, so I'm watching the live CNN feed about Christopher Dorner.  Right now he is supposedly holed up in a cabin which is burning to the ground.

And because this dude was evidently pretty heavily armed, it got me thinking about the whole gun-control debate.

And on the CNN feed, they were talking about the tactical weapons that the San Bernardino and LA police would be able to deploy.  Things like infrared stuff and high-tech surveillance and all kinds of James Bond-like stuff, and I'm thinking, well yeah, but why couldn't Dorner have access to that stuff too?

Because it's fantastically expensive.

Today my boss and I were separately surfing the web in work areas adjacent to each other, when all of a sudden I could hear "Chiquitita" by ABBA blaring from his computer.  And the song went on, and on, and on, until I started laughing and said, "Boss, I didn't know you were an ABBA fan!"   And he said, "I'm watching the new Bugatti ad, and that's the song they're using."  And he went on to say that the new Bugatti has dual engines, and a top speed of 246 mph, and costs a cool 1.6 million.

And I'm thinking, well, that's excellent, if you've got 1.6 mil to blow.

So.  My point.  I do have one. 

I do not know what semi-automatic weapons cost.  I really don't have any idea.  But why not, say, pass legislation that says that if you want to buy one, fine, but we're gonna slap a tax on it.  A tax of, say, thirty grand per weapon.

Wouldn't that get them off the streets?  I mean, sure, people would still have access to Saturday Night Specials, if they're so damn intent on protecting their home or robbing people or whatever.  But the shit that  fires sixty rounds a minute?  Yep,  you can still get it, the same way you can buy a Bugatti, but it's gonna cost ya.  And yeah, you could still steal one, but how many of them would actually be OUT there, available, if they cost thirty grand each?  I'm thinking they'd be about as common as Bugattis. 

I dunno. I'm just throwing it out there.


~~Silk said...

Taxing is a time-honored way to discourage the public from buying/doing something. However, that something has to be too small to encourage a black market. No one is going to chance prison for the profits on a truckload of untaxed cigarettes, but they will for a truckload of heroin.

Also, you don't want people to get the impression that only the government and the "rich overlords" (the ruling 1%) can buy certain guns. Now that we "don't have the means to stop those who want to crush and enslave us", the conspiracy theory would be impossible to discredit.

rockygrace said...

~~Silk, it seems like a lot of the gun nuts say they need to stockpile automatic weapons in case worse comes to worst. The zombies attack, Iran launches nukes, whatever. Think "Doomsday Preppers". I've always thought that if the world does go kerflooey, I'd need one gun, with one bullet, in order to off myself, because I sure as SHIT don't want to be around for the post-apocalyptic party.