California will double the taxes on guns and ammunition and use the money to pay for more security at public schools and various violence prevention programs under a new law Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Tuesday.

The federal government already taxes the sale of guns and ammunition at either 10% or 11%, depending on the type of gun. The law Newsom signed adds another 11% tax on top of that — making it the only state with its own tax on guns and ammunition, according to the gun control advocacy group Brady.

Newsom — a potential Democratic candidate for president beyond 2024 — has a reputation as one of the country’s most liberal governors. But he has often refused to raise taxes, even for causes he supports like combating climate change.

But it would have been difficult for Newsom to veto this tax increase, given his outspoken support for gun restrictions at the state and national level. Newsom is in the middle of a national campaign to amend the U.S. Constitution to restrict gun sales to people over 21, require extensive background checks, impose a waiting period for purchases and ban the sale of assault-style weapons. Restrictions like that are in place in some states, but not in the Constitution.

  • sudo22@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    9 months ago

    This title and focus of this article is weird.

    “California will ban people from carrying firearms in most public places” and then it goes on about the tax.

    I feel like the carry ban is a far larger story then the tax. Not just because its blatantly unconstitutional but it directly opposes very recent rulings from the highest court in America

    • tryptaminev 🇵🇸 🇺🇦 🇪🇺@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      How is it “blatantly unconstitutional”? The right to bear arms seem to be only in conjunction with a well regulated militia. Something that yet has to be found in the USA. And a well regulated militia would not run about their daily business with a gun ready to murder the next cop passing by, because he eyed them weirdly.

      • sudo22@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        9 months ago

        SCOTUS ruled it unconstitutional a last year.

        “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”

        Arms are a “right of the people” not the militia. A militia is a result of, not a prerequisite for, the right to bear arms. “well regulated” doesn’t mean government regulation it means well armed, supplied, and trained