Published by CTBC Director on 20 Aug 2009 at 08:00 pm
Balancing the Budget with new “Fees?” Ritter Gun Tax joins Colorado Car Tax in Mullarkey-sanctioned TABOR runaround
Well, that didn’t take long.
In Monday’s article predicting that new “fees“, not new taxes, would be the preferred approach of the Governor and the Colorado Legislature to address our state’s “fiscal crisis” (in reality more of a spending issue, not a revenue shortfall), I’d thought (paraphrasing Will Rogers) that my wallet was safe until the Legislature was back in session. Although that’s still technically true (since the latest proposed “fee” increases still require legislative approval before going into effect), less than a day passed between my prediction and the first new “fee” proposal by Governor Ritter.
Ritter’s Colorado Gun Tax is the latest scheme to target a maligned minority group (gun-owners) to bear the burden of additional charges (pardon, “fees“) in order to exercise a constitutional right. Under Ritter’s proposed budget plan, the state would levy “a fee increase for background checks on gun sales” as well as increasing the fee for Concealed-Carry Weapons (CCW) permits.
This follows on the heels of the 2009 Legislative Session’s Tobacco Tax increase, HB1342 (technically, an elimination of the long-standing Colorado state tax exemption for tobacco products).
Does anyone think that our governor and legislators will stop with targeting gun-owners and smokers? Not by a long shot (pardon the pun); they’re just getting warmed up:
The “nearly $2 billion in tax credits, incentives, and exemptions in state law”- which includes exemptions on taxing groceries, internet access, gasoline, fuel for residential heat, etc. (view the complete list) - was previously shielded from legislative raids on your wallet by TABOR, until the Mullarkey Court declared “open season” on these credits as part of the “Mill Levy Tax Freeze” ruling.
Ritter and the Colorado Legislature were similarly prohibited from bypassing TABOR - and TABOR’s requirement for a vote of the people on tax increases - by raising taxes disguised as “fees” until the Mullarkey Court’s “November Surprise” ruling in the Barber v. Ritter case.
The Mullarkey Majority has been aiding and abetting the sticky fingers of state government in YOUR wallet. It’s high time to hold them accountable - vote “NO” on retaining these unjust justices in 2010.
Let’s Clear The Bench, Colorado!
Tags: Alex Martinez, background check, Barber v. Ritter, Bill Ritter, Colorado Car Tax, Colorado Constitution, Colorado Gun Tax, Colorado Judges, Colorado Mill Levy, Colorado Supreme Court, Concealed Carry, gun rights, HB1342, judical activism, judicial accountability, judicial evaluation, judicial retention, judicial usurpation, Know Your Judge, Mark Ferrandino, Mary Mullarkey, Michael Bender, Mill Levy Tax Colorado, Mill Levy Tax Freeze, Mullarkey Court, Mullarkey Majority, Nancy Rice, Second Amendment, TABOR, unjust justices
Jack Neary on 27 Aug 2009 at 1:42 PM #
This is what happens when too many Californian’s move into the state.
Kyle on 01 Sep 2009 at 10:42 AM #
Let us examine a few faults in Ritter’s plan. Firstly, he vetoed the Brady Bypass Bill that would have removed the requirement to have a background check for those with CCW permits from Colorado, thereby keeping the CBI (Colorado Bureau of Investigation) and NCIC check mandatory for all purchasers (setting us up). Now he complains that the system can’t sustain itself and needs to charge a fee to those using the system. Had the Brady Bypass Bill passed, it would have significantly reduced the workload on CBI to do the checks. Additionally, CBI can just be cut out of the loop entirely. The Brady Bill requires an FBI background check, and Colorado law requires that CBI do a check as well. If CBI were cut out of the loop then your local gun store would simply call the FBI directly for your check and the process would take about 5 to 10 minutes. As it stands, your local gun shop has to get on their computer, send your info to CBI, CBI sends it to the FBI, and you have to wait on BOTH checks, one of which isn’t required by federal law. If Ritter were really interested in saving money he would just do away with the CBI portion, but that would remove some of his control over the people of Colorado.
Want another kick below the belt? Colorado has one of the highest rates of false denials for background checks in the country. That means that if you buy a firearm and get denied it’s probably a clerical or other error on the part of CBI. Yes, you may have been approved by the FBI portion of the check but been denied by CBI because someone with a name similar to yours was in trouble, or because they don’t like a non-disqualifying offense in your youth (or something else). Even worse than that, I have seen actual prohibited people be denied and just not get their gun. This means that they committed a crime by being a prohibited person and trying to buy a gun, CBI knows about it, and nothing happens to these people. However, if you have unpaid parking, speeding, or other tickets, the police will come right to the dealer and arrest you on the spot. I’ve seen this THREE times thus far. One guy was because he hadn’t paid a ticket for his dog doing its business in a public park and he didn’t pick it up in a timely manor. You see, if they can get money from you they’ll enforce the law, if they can’t… So the CBI check is a failing program and Ritter wants you to pay for the privilege of being screwed by it.
My questions to any and all readers is this: How much does CBI spend on the background check system that the state could save if the program were done away with? What are the complete and verifiable stats on the CBI program? Confront these people with FACTS!! It’s the only way we’ll win the war for Liberty.
Derec on 02 Sep 2009 at 8:31 AM #
Great comment!
I work in a field that requires professional licensing by the state of Colorado along with a CBI check. I’m also applying for a concealed weapons permit and have to pay for 2 CBI checks within a month. Why the heck can’t they just use one, unless it’s a money maker for the state?
I know with security clearances, your background checks can be used by multiple organizations and purposed while it’s valid, Colorado needs to have a life span on CBI checks like that as well or get them out of the process.
Frank Galmish on 02 Sep 2009 at 9:19 AM #
I didn’t vote for Ritter and never will-especially as all Democrats that have their hand in our pockets-they all want the cake but won’t help the little red hen make it
Gary on 15 Feb 2010 at 1:11 PM #
Just to show how inefficiant the CBI is a local Deputy Sheriff that carries an issued firearm was denied the ability to purchase a private firearm by the CBI. The FBI check cleared him but a clerical error in the CBI found a reason that he should be denied to have a firearm. Yes he finally did get it cleared up and purchased his gun but it cost him to get them cleaned up.
Something is wrong when the very person we depend on to protect us gets caught up in State incompetance.