Bullet tax eyed in bid to curb Chicago crime

AP Photo/M. Spencer Green

CHICAGO As Chicago struggles to quell gang violence that has contributed to a jump in homicides, a top elected official wants to tax the sale of every bullet and firearm — an effort even she acknowledges could spark a legal challenge.

Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle will submit a budget proposal Thursday that calls for a tax of a nickel for each bullet and $25 for each firearm sold in the nation's second-largest county, which encompasses Chicago.

Preckwinkle's office estimates the tax will generate about $1 million a year, money that would be used for various county services, including medical care for gunshot victims. Law enforcement officials would not have to pay the tax, but the office said it would apply to 40 federally licensed gun dealers in the county.

Through last week, the city reported 409 homicides this year compared to 324 during the same period in 2011. Although the violence still doesn't approach the nearly 900 homicides a year Chicago averaged in the 1990s, officials say gang violence was largely to blame for a rash of shootings earlier this year.

• As heat soars, so does Chicago crime
• Emanuel: Chicago's escalating crime about "values"

Preckwinkle insists the ordinance is far more about addressing gun violence than raising money for a county that faces a deficit of more than $100 million next year.

"We think that's an appropriate thing to do, especially in the light of the gun violence we struggle to deal with in our criminal justice system and our public health system," she told a local newspaper editorial board this week, according to a transcript of the meeting provided by her office. "The legal gun shops in suburban Cook County are a conduit for crimes in Chicago. There's no way around it."

Preckwinkle declined to speak with The Associated Press ahead of the announcement Thursday, but her spokeswoman Kristen Mack confirmed the details of the plan.

Mack said the office has found no other jurisdiction in the nation that has imposed a tax on bullets, even though several have considered it. Legislation on such a tax was previously introduced by state lawmakers in Springfield, but has never been voted on, she said.

Richard Pearson, the executive director of the Illinois State Rifle Association, scoffs at such talk, saying the tax wouldn't do anything to address gang violence but would harm local businesses and law-abiding citizens.

"If she wants to get to the people causing all the problems she ought to put a tax on street gangs," he said. "All this is going to do is drive business out of Cook County, into other counties, Indiana and Wisconsin."

One suburban gun shop owner agreed, saying that his customers, many of whom are hunters and police officers, will simply go elsewhere.

"Who's going to come to Tinley Park to buy ammunition?" asked Fred Lutger, the owner of Freddie Bear Sport in that suburban Chicago community.

And, said Lutger of that money going toward treating gunshot victims, "Why should be paying for gang bangers shooting each other? You're taxing law-abiding citizens for what criminals are doing."

Gun rights advocates spent years challenging in court Chicago's handgun ban, which was ultimately overturned in 2010 by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Lutger said a lawsuit was certain. Pearson said he and others started talking about a legal challenge as soon as they heard Preckwinkle was considering the tax.

Even Preckwinkle seemed resigned to a legal challenge in her comments to the newspaper board.

"You can't make decisions based on the basis of whether or not somebody's going to sue you or then you'll never do anything," she said.

[zothammog]

Anyone who thinks that taking guns away from law-abiding citizens will end gun violence is sadly deluded. Millions of criminals in this country have weapons. They are not going to turn them in if gun ownership is made illegal. They ALREADY have illegal guns, and they are not registered, so the cops can't collect them.

I know how long it takes the cops to reach my house. That's why I own a gun. And I am trained to use it properly. And I will not hesitate to defend myself in my own home. The cops can clean up the mess - when they finally arrive!

[tryingtodogoodwork]

$5,000 per bullet would be sane and good.

[bigdeey12]

Toni WHAT? With a name like that can any sane person take anything she says seriously? Maybe Bambi Woods could get a brothel tax on next years ballot! Toni, some advice, change your name... just saying! Oh by the way how are you going to tax ammo that people make at home. Has anyone ever informed you that you are a moron? If not allow me to be the first!

[alixoblix]

Jeez, I was going to shoot someone, but the extra 10ct for the bullet made me stop.

[alixoblix]

Jeez, I was going to shoot someone, but the extra 10ct for the bullet made me stop.

[RetiredArmy_Nurse]

Again, the neocons seem to go into coniption fits over my idea of ammo control being more effective than gun control in previous post. I reported two of them for racist comments, a couple of additional ignorant, argumentative comments are best just left ignored.

[RetiredArmy_Nurse]

Wmtipton, CBS did remove the racist posts, so I guess they did find a problem with some of the neocon replies. Calling me a spoiled 3 year old is a personal attack. I do not think I could have served near 3 decades in military service if I were that. And calling me an "idiotic liberal nutjob" with a "feelgood idea" also constitues a personal attack. Would you say that to me if you met me at a VFW meeting wearing my Post bider? I kind of doubt it.

[WJBradley]

The death sentence for murderers, properly applied, would have an effect on violent crime. This will not.

[RetiredArmy_Nurse]

Well, I really got a rise out of some neocons when I pointed out that bullet control was far easier than actual gun control. They thought my post was sarcastic & not serious. Actually, it is a serious idea that needs to be tried. Administered as a federal tax, it would make bullets much more of a luxury to buy. I thought ammunition goes bad after time, but a number of the neocon posters disagreed with that. I really do not know as my only experience is firing expert with the 45 caliber pistol & M-16 in the Army. However, once used, ammunition cannot be used again. I also pointed out that such a tax might fall upon the real "takers" in society. The neocons also had a real problem with the term "takers" and said they had no idea what that meant. I refer to those who should have no access to guns and take lives, some 11,000 each year. Latest news is an armed crazie shot 4 women in a beauty parlor, killing three plus himself. There is huge loss of life thanks to so many loose guns in society, there is also huge cost in medical bills to those wounded--much of these costs are bourn by society. We curtailed smoking with high tobacco taxes, making cigarettes just too expensive for most to smoke. Now let's make guns just too expensive to shoot.

[ripkitty]

I don't know what a neocon is either, but taxing "bullets" is not going to do any good at all to either slow or prevent crime, gangsters, or murder in Chicago. retiredarmy_nurse, you seem like a sincere person so that's what you're getting back from me. Listen - it just won't work! What will work is more enforcement of existing laws, good families raising the best kids they can, and respect for the United States.

These "takers" will get the bullets the same place they get the guns - they'll steal them from lawful owners. Just like they do narcotics. You say they should have no access to guns? This access is already banned by law and look what happens.

I admire your goals, and they are most likely the same as mine, but your approach won't work. Not today and not ever.

[DoJo724]

It's pretentious to think the only way a person can disagree with this is if they are a neocon. I'm not a conservative, but I disagree with this because it is irrational and makes no practical sense.

First, only a true idiot would believe that the criminals causing the violence in Chicago wouldn't steal bullets. "Gosh, I really want to do a drive-by shooting, but it will cost me $5 more for a box of bullets. I guess I won't do it, then." Sorry, this is just stupid.

Second, it assumes that people who live in Chicago can only by bullets in Chicago. I'm sure any gun dealers or sports shops in the surrounding suburbs love this idea, since their business is bound to go up.

I'm not going to go into this any further, because I really don't care that much about gun control issues. However, the idea that a bullet tax will reduce violence is such a special brand of stupid, I couldn't let it pass.

[hipshotpercusion]

I am so glad I got out of the Cesspool called Illinois! I now reside in SW FL and guess what...We carry guns here and we can use them. You folks in Illinois should wise up and throw out the corrupt politicians poising your State, pronto!

Steve packing 24/7/365 in sunny FL.

[ripkitty]

@hipshotpercusion - That makes two of us, brother. Sunny Estero FL here, on the Gulf Coast and loving it. BTW - My Ruger LCR fits just fine in my shorts pocket!

[melbatom]

No tax will EVER be collect from the crimminal element. I would suggest that people in Chicago UNELECT the political figures behind this type of stupid. Armed citizens are a major danger to crimminal activity. You can not tell who is armed hence the end of your CRIMMINAL attempt to do what ever you do against citizens may end in a way you do not expect.

[RetiredArmy_Nurse]

Well, best guess is the "criminal element" will pay the tax indirectly. They still have to buy their ammo from someone and that someone would have to have paid the tax along the line. An easy way to make the ammo expensive before it gets to the consumer is to levy the tax upon production. That way, the ammo company pays the tax and passes that cost to the buyer, whoever he might be. It's possible we might exempt real hunters from the tax by giving them a tax credit with their hunting license. This would put ammo mostly in the hands of real hunters, not criminals.