|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
FL: Florida Dept. of Revenue targeting gun clubs
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
A reader, who happens to be a retired accountant, pointed out that what the DOR is attempting is already prohibited by state law.
He provided a link to the applicable rules, which state: "Dues and fees paid by persons for memberships in clubs that do not entitle the members to use recreational or physical fitness facilities are not subject to tax. Examples of such clubs are sewing clubs, bowling clubs, square dancing clubs, bridge clubs, and gun clubs where the dues or fees entitle the payor to be a member, but do not entitle the payor to use recreational or physical fitness facilities."
"The rules already exclude gun clubs, but not much can be done when the folks at DOR refuse to obey the rules," he said.
I couldn't agree more. |
| Comment by:
teebonicus
(4/2/2015)
|
THIS IS STINK!!!
It is government yet again ignoring its own laws. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|
