As if I needed additional confirmation that I made the right decision by leaving that rat's nest.

Also, jay, have you been following Senate Bill 44? We had quite the day at the State Houses yesterday.

Why stop at $25. How about $25,000? What's a few zeros among friends. Not only will it raise more money for spinal research (I mean the tax rate has no impact on tax revenues other than to make them go up, up, up, which is clear to any one except those knuckle dragers who go on about the laffer curve), it will mean fewer crimes are committed. Follow the logic. Poor people commit crimes out of proportion to their numbers. Since $25,000 is beyond the means for most poor people, it would logically follow that fewer poor people would buy guns so they couldn't use the guns in commission of a crime.

The problem with the Mass. legislature is they are pikers. Grab hold of the hand basket, they have a destination in mind for their state.

leave it to the demacraps for leaveling tax on everything we have i mean we started a revolution on a tea tax why dont we make those dems pay tax on their stupid ideas and preposals

This is only another means to further strip Americans of their Constitutional right. Adding that tax will eliminate a percentage of the public who will not be able to afford to purchase a gun.

This tactic is an old one dating back many years by the gun grabbers. As "Anotherjohn" asked, "Why stop at $25?" That's exactly the point. They won't.

Let's see Massachusetts add a $25.00 tax to free speech. Make citizens buy a permit and undergo a federal background check to get a permit so they can now have the limited right to free speech. We WILL have to put controls on it. That's only right. People get hurt when others practice free speech.

It's doubtful that there are enough sales of handguns in Mass that the proceeds of this tax would even pay the salary and benefits of some state bureaucrat hired to 'administer' this program.

Then again, I'm sure Deval Patrick has a friend or relative who needs a state job. Anything to reduce the unemployment figures.

I found the following in the linked story:

A man paralyzed in a motorcycle accident while serving as a Boston police cadet in 1995 and other advocates also appeared in their wheelchairs before the Legislature's Joint Committee on Health Care Financing to emphasize how critical it is to raise more money for spinal cord research.

I don't blame those in wheelchairs for wanting funding, but it's disingenuous to claim only gun buyers should pay a special tax when traffic accident victims are sitting before the committee. Most likely it was the fault of a car driver that put this man in a wheelchair. Why not add the tax to cars and motorcycles? Just think of the money that would raise. Well here's the answer:

The logic, Fagan said, is that both guns and construction sites cause a large number of spinal cord injuries and that both gun owners and builders tend to be affluent.

Liberals hate other people being affluent. It's ok if they are affluent themselves, but not others and particularly if they have guns.

Then there's this at the end of the story:

Williams said "There's a lot of barriers, financially, environmentally," he told the legislators. "Insurance only covers so much."

It looks like Williams is hoping the money can be used to pay his bills as well as research. Now it clear, a tax on gun purchases means hitting both the affluent and gun owners at the same time. Two groups hated by liberals.

Wake up people, it's all the guns fault. I caught my Ruger 44 Mag going out the door last night for a murder party. Had to drag it back in and oil it to keep it home. Is there a functioning brian is the entire democrat party? Sure doesn't look like it. Guess they all had brain surgery to remove the frontal lobe common sense and reasoning portion. That would make sense since common sense to a democrat is like cancer to the average person. Something to be avoided.

It is a prove fact that knives and scissors are the weapons of choice in most murders and maiming, I don t see anyone going after them, the way that they are going after handguns. Could it be that the criminals and the people who protect them, don't want their victims fighting back? It sure would seen so.

"The notion seems to be this: since a lot of spinal injuries are caused by handguns, the gun owners should help pick up the tab for their treatment."

What is 'a lot' of injuries? What percentage of spinal injuries are caused by handguns? What percentage of spinal injuries caused by handguns were suffered by those engaged in criminal activity?

Mac has it: the tax should apply to motorcycles, be about $250.00 attached to registration, not sales; and should be split for Trauma Center Research, Head Injury Research, Spinal Cord injury research, and PTSD treatment for all the medics who have to pick up the pieces after these mishaps! And in Massachusetts, maybe they should tax polo too.