Posts

NSSF Threatens Costly Lawsuit If Seattle Mayor Signs Gun Violence Tax In To Law

Seattle’s leftist progressive government running on emotions approved a sales tax of $25 on each firearm sold and five cents for each round of ammunition (two cents for .22 caliber).

Washington state preemption laws will lead to the city into a costly lawsuit if Mayor Ed Murray signs the “gun violence tax” in to law violating the state statute.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation, the trade association for the firearms and ammunition industry, says it intends to file a lawsuit challenging the City of Seattle’s recently NSSF and other pro-gun groups fought the legislation, labeled a “gun violence tax,” but the City Council nevertheless approved the ordinance on August 10. Seattle Mayor Ed Murray has indicated support for the measure. NSSF today sent the mayor a letter urging him to veto the unlawful tax and letting him know that if the law was enacted “NSSF will have no alternative but to file a lawsuit” against the City to invalidate this unlawful regulation of the lawful sale of firearms and ammunition on the grounds that it violates Washington state’s preemption statute that blocks cities from regulating the sale of firearms. Additionally, the letter points out that the tax burdens citizens from exercising their Second Amendment right to purchase a firearm.

“This ordinance will do little to promote public safety and instead will place an undue burden on both federally licensed firearms retailers and law-abiding citizens who want to purchase firearms, particularly people in less well-off circumstances,” said Lawrence G. Keane, Senior Vice President and General Counsel of NSSF. “This law is nothing but a ‘poll tax’ on the Second Amendment and an effort to drive Seattle’s firearms retailers out of business.”

If I were a Seattle taxpayer, I’d be furious that the city council and Mayor Murray are going to force an expensive and apparently doomed lawsuit for what appears to be nothing more or less than political theater.

Federal court says state can enforce ‘docs vs. Glocks’ law

Florida can start enforcing a contentious law that restricts what doctors can say to patients about guns.

The measure was first adopted by the Florida Legislature four years ago, but had been caught in a lengthy court battle in which a federal judge in Miami had blocked the law from taking effect.

But the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta on Tuesday issued a new ruling that lifts the injunction that had blocked enforcement of the law.

The measure, signed into law in 2011 by Gov. Rick Scott, prohibited doctors from asking patients about their gun ownership or recording that information in medical records unless it was medically necessary.

A panel split 2-1 over the law with the majority of judges finding that the law is constitutional and doesn’t violate First Amendment speech rights of doctors. It is the second time the appeals court has ruled on the measure and the decision is likely to be appealed.

“The act codifies the commonsense conclusion that good medical care does not require inquiry or record-keeping regarding firearms when unnecessary to a patient’s care—especially not when that inquiry or record-keeping constitutes such a substantial intrusion upon patient privacy,” said the opinion written by U.S. Circuit Judge Gerald Tjoflat.

Florida’s Republican-controlled Legislature adopted the Firearm Owners’ Privacy Act after an Ocala couple complained that a doctor had asked them about guns. The two say they refused to answer and the physician refused to see them again.

The 2011 law, which had become popularly known as “Docs vs. Glocks,” was challenged by organizations representing 11,000 state health providers, including the Florida chapters of the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Academy of Family Physicians.

Doctors who break the law could potentially be fined and lose their licenses.