Anonymous wrote:Pay for it via a federal tax on ammunition.

Great idea we can balance the budget if we tax bullets, birth control, pain killers, marijuana, cigarettes and alcohol.

Tax it all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tax bullets at $1,000 per. Do that, and I'm on board with this proposal.

Ha, yes. There was a funny Chris Rock bit about this a few years ago. Have all the guns you want, but the bullets are 5k.

Yep. I think the joke had to do with, no more random bystander victims. Who is gonna waste $5k on a random bystander?

And something like, when someone gets shot, you think - at 5k, they must have really done something to deserve that. Obviously very non-PC, but really funny. I just watched it on youtube. The minutes following it are very eery - he's talking about Columbine, but so much of it applies now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tax bullets at $1,000 per. Do that, and I'm on board with this proposal.

Ha, yes. There was a funny Chris Rock bit about this a few years ago. Have all the guns you want, but the bullets are 5k.

Yep. I think the joke had to do with, no more random bystander victims. Who is gonna waste $5k on a random bystander?

Pay for it via a federal tax on ammunition.

Anonymous wrote:Tax bullets at $1,000 per. Do that, and I'm on board with this proposal.

Ha, yes. There was a funny Chris Rock bit about this a few years ago. Have all the guns you want, but the bullets are 5k.

Anonymous wrote:And does this include preschools and daycares?

So instead of banning assault weapons which would not cost me anything, we are putting armed guards in every school. Who is paying for this? Is it coming out of the already stretched school budgets? Or are we raising taxes for this?

I think the idea is absurd but if we are going this route, I advocate a tax on guns to generate the revenue needed to pay for these armed guards. That is only fair.

No, preschools and daycares are privately funded and would have to fund their own guards.

Anonymous wrote:The NRA says they will pay for it.

I didn't hear that. I heard LaPierre urging Congress to “act immediately to appropriate whatever is necessary to put armed police officers in every single school in this nation.” It's unlikely a seasoned lobbyist like LaPierre misspoke. He meant to take it from the federal coffers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about the National Guard or Reserves have to put schools on their training rotation?

better.

Maybe a weekly rotation for the local cops, instead of stop sign monitoring, also.

Anonymous wrote:How about the National Guard or Reserves have to put schools on their training rotation?

better.

How about the National Guard or Reserves have to put schools on their training rotation?

All this so they can forego any type of gun control? Serioulsy?

Tax bullets at $1,000 per. Do that, and I'm on board with this proposal.

The NRA said they would pay for it? I didn't watch the news conference but here is a quote from the article:

Given federal spending in areas such as foreign affairs, "can't we afford to put a police officer in every single school?" LaPierre asked.

That seems to imply the federal government is supposed to pay for it. The article also notes there are at least 132,000 schools in the US. If we pay each armed guard about $100,000 (not sure the going rate for armed guards), that is a cost of $13 billion per year. Didn't realize the NRA had so much money...

The NRA says they will pay for it.

And does this include preschools and daycares?

So instead of banning assault weapons which would not cost me anything, we are putting armed guards in every school. Who is paying for this? Is it coming out of the already stretched school budgets? Or are we raising taxes for this?

I think the idea is absurd but if we are going this route, I advocate a tax on guns to generate the revenue needed to pay for these armed guards. That is only fair.