Rep. Clyde Introduces Legislation to Eliminate the Excise Tax on Firearms and Ammunition

That's all cool but it's a small bone thrown at target shooters who are providing a larger and larger portion of conservation funding through the excise tax. Over the last decade, recreational shooting has flourished even without PR funds. In contrast, hunter numbers have flatline over the last decade.
Having tried to work on establishing a range it’s a massive pain the butt; finding land that might be available and the not in my back yard issues are huge. Keeping them clean, staffing etc are just more and more problems that pop up. I’d also wager a large chunk of shooters really don’t want to shoot at an organized range with rules
 
Might want to talk to some folks about that...


I agree to some extent.

Though it has nothing to do with the original intent of PR, honestly I can't think of a more bipartisan well thought out and crafted law and it's a great thing to point to in terms of the societal benefits of shooting, and of hunting and of folks paying it forward to protect a resource.

In a similar vein the Land and Water Conservation Fund doesn't benefit Oil companies nor promote drilling.

Also just being honest here, there is no argument you can make that would sway me in my belief that this is reckless populism, it's gonna get some votes for a few folks in the near term but has some pretty crappy consequence for this country in the long term.

I don't disagree with anything you are saying and I never made an argument to end PR. I even said as much in my first post. My response was in reference to the data that shows non-hunters are making up a larger portion of the shooting community. Every study/poll/survey shows that hunter numbers across the US are at best flatlined. Yes, I know that is not the case out west, but it is the case overall.

Meanwhile, attacks on sports shooting by hunters do not go unnoticed and a growing number of the shooting community is making the excise tax connection. They don't really need or care about PR dollars going to shooting ranges. Afterall, their numbers grew without it. They also are starting to recognize that a lot of public use activity (hiking, rock climbing, bird watching, etc.) do not similarly get taxed for their gear.

Regardless of whether one believes conservation efforts should or shouldn't hinge on being paid by the user, the perception is out there and if you abuse a group long enough, you can expect pushback. I'm not sure that's where we are at now, but you better believe that this legislation has caught the eye of some in the shooting community.

Again, I'm in no way in favor of changing PR unless it's adding more contributors. But I personally think it's a mistake to isolate a group that already considerably contributes. But then again, maybe I'm wrong and only feel this way because I'm a member of the shooting community as well as a hunter.
 
I have one friend that shoots but abhors hunting. When I mentioned PR, I wished I hadn't. He said something to the effect of, "That's BS." So, I don't think this bill is as ridiculous as some here have made it seem. There are definitely people out there that make no connection between shooting and conservation and would get rid of PR with no regrets.
 
Just off the phone with some folks in DC. This bill is DOA. NSSF is leading the lobbying efforts against it. All the hunting groups are against it. They are letting the sponsor and co-sponsors know about the stupidity of the idea.

GOA is behind the vey small portion of support it does have.

That said, if your legislator is on that list of knotheads posturing for fringe political ideologies, light them up with your comments. It is this kind of BS that takes our issues and drags them into the political arena that causes us to lose the bigger game. These co-sponsors think it is worth these cute little stunts to gain publicity at the expense of hunting, access, and conservation.

If you are from Montana, Matt Rosendale needs to hear from you - https://rosendale.house.gov/

Dear Representative Rosendale:

As a lifetime gun owner, Life Endowment Member of the NRA, lifetime hunter, and active volunteer in conservation and public access causes, I am writing to request that you drop your sponsorship of H.R. 8167 -https://files.constantcontact.com/647991c4801/7bca5faa-a7cd-4eab-a682-a3ed8c3451ff.pdf?rdr=true

I am very involved in hunting, shooting, and conservation issues. I have yet to hear from anyone in Montana asking for this bill. I have yet to hear any of my hunting and shooting friends supporting for this bill. I have many friends and business associates at the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the American Wildlife Conservation Partners, and many other national organizations, and not a single group or person from those organizations is in support of this legislation.

I would ask that you drop your support of this proposal. I would ask that you work with your fellow sponsors to drop this proposal and work on more ways to fund conservation and shooting facilities, as is funded by the excise taxes on our firearm and ammunition purchases. We need more funding for conservation and shooting, not less.

This bill is a bad idea for Montana. Please drop your support.

Sincerely,


Randy Newberg
 
Yea- seems like more of a Bethesda guy. Maybe Prince George County... B-More may be a touch 'urban' for his liking.
For sure locks the doors when the skyline comes into view from 95. Man probably hasn’t even eaten pit beef.
 
I sent a note to my area rep Tom Tiffany. I still can't believe his name is on that piece of trash... :(
 
Just off the phone with some folks in DC. This bill is DOA. NSSF is leading the lobbying efforts against it. All the hunting groups are against it. They are letting the sponsor and co-sponsors know about the stupidity of the idea.

GOA is behind the vey small portion of support it does have.

That said, if your legislator is on that list of knotheads posturing for fringe political ideologies, light them up with your comments. It is this kind of BS that takes our issues and drags them into the political arena that causes us to lose the bigger game. These co-sponsors think it is worth these cute little stunts to gain publicity at the expense of hunting, access, and conservation.

If you are from Montana, Matt Rosendale needs to hear from you - https://rosendale.house.gov/
My thoughts on how brilliant his decision was to attach himself to this bill have been sent. I’m so sick of this crap. How someone could even suggest this is beyond me.
 
Guns = Good
Taxes = Bad
Critical thinking = Nonexistent
A lot of people jumping on here ready to crucify people for challenging PR.

Let me be CLEAR that I support PR and conservation, but seeing as how many people are quick to react, let me ask you this…

How much money in the TAX is ACTUALLY going to conservation? I for one know that the government spending is absolutely insane and reckless. TONS of spending waste.

I’d like to see an audit to confirm actually how much is going to conservation.

That is critical thinking.
 
A lot of people jumping on here ready to crucify people for challenging PR.

Let me be CLEAR that I support PR and conservation, but seeing as how many people are quick to react, let me ask you this…

How much money in the TAX is ACTUALLY going to conservation? I for one know that the government spending is absolutely insane and reckless. TONS of spending waste.

I’d like to see an audit to confirm actually how much is going to conservation.

That is critical thinking.

Tons of publicly accessible information out there about PR fund allocations to critically think about.
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
113,668
Messages
2,028,990
Members
36,275
Latest member
johnw3474
Back
Top