Should those who drink alcohol pay a special tax to cover the damage it causes

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • arthrimus

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Dec 1, 2012
    456
    18
    Carmel
    Alcohol-related auto crashes alone totals more than $51 billion annually and that's not counting the rest of the harm to society. A $1 per % of alcohol in the product will go to a common pool to pay for that damage so that we who don't drink don't have it come out of our pockets.

    This would add $5-6 per can of beer, $4-20 dollars per bottle of wine, and $50 or more to whiskey, rum and others. It will also encourage the manufacturers to not make such potent, dangerous products.

    If you don't agree with this then you are on the side of the drunk drivers who kill innocent people. You have their blood on your hands.

    Very nice!

    Edit: This thread is full of win! and a few pockets of fail, but mostly win!
     
    Last edited:

    RedneckReject

    Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Oct 6, 2012
    26,170
    63
    Indianapolis
    I laughed incredibly hard at this thread. But then again, I have consumed a decent amount of alcohol this evening.

    No, it's not purple....because it's true. But at least I'm still sober enough to see the comedy in this....for the moment
     

    mydoghasfleas

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    13   0   0
    Nov 19, 2011
    1,082
    38
    Undisclosed
    Slippery slope where does it end


    0024e0cb_medium.jpeg
     
    Rating - 100%
    17   0   0
    Feb 16, 2010
    1,506
    38
    Absolutely, and you should have to have special licenses to possess beer and carry it in public. Registration should be required, varying by state.

    And not only should you be carded, but a database should be kept of what you buy, when and where.

    We don't want you contributing to minors or anything like that...
     

    PAMom

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 5, 2011
    200
    16
    Why don't we just add a disclaimer to everything gun and ammo related. I suggest "Remember, shoot responsibility". Doesn't that cover it?
     

    Indy 1911

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Feb 4, 2013
    216
    28
    Jack is an idiot. Blame everyone for the few that cant take care of themselves. Lets just tax everything more. The government is known for using all of money for useful things without waste.
     

    CarmelHP

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 14, 2008
    7,633
    48
    Carmel
    Jack is an idiot. Blame everyone for the few that cant take care of themselves. Lets just tax everything more. The government is known for using all of money for useful things without waste.

    Yet another who missed the point of the modest proposal.
     

    Indy 1911

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Feb 4, 2013
    216
    28
    Yes. I must have missed something. I rarely drink, but should not have to pay 6.00 for a can of beer. What is the point I am missing
     

    CarmelHP

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 14, 2008
    7,633
    48
    Carmel
    Yes. I must have missed something. I rarely drink, but should not have to pay 6.00 for a can of beer. What is the point I am missing

    The OP is taking the gun grabbers "logic" and applying it to everyday commodities that most use in order to make a point about the ridiculous nature of the anti-gun proposals. I shouldn't have to explain this, I didn't think it was too hard to miss.

    See, Modest Proposal for an explanation of this rhetorical device.
     

    cobber

    Parrot Daddy
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    44   0   0
    Sep 14, 2011
    10,342
    149
    PR-WLAF
    The OP is taking the gun grabbers "logic" and applying it to everyday commodities that most use in order to make a point about the ridiculous nature of the anti-gun proposals. I shouldn't have to explain this, I didn't think it was too hard to miss.

    See, Modest Proposal for an explanation of this rhetorical device.

    Thank you for explaining the obvious. This is why we cannot have sophisticated discourse, or something that passes for it, here on INGO.
    :laugh:

    Wait a durn' minute, are they eating Irish babies in England now??? :eek:
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    62,258
    113
    Gtown-ish
    The OP is taking the gun grabbers "logic" and applying it to everyday commodities that most use in order to make a point about the ridiculous nature of the anti-gun proposals. I shouldn't have to explain this, I didn't think it was too hard to miss.

    See, Modest Proposal for an explanation of this rhetorical device.

    Yeah but that doesn't work anyway. The hoplophobic gun grabbers just lable the comparison a false equivelence.
     
    Top Bottom