Repeal Pittman-Robertson Act?!

[MattM37]

Can't fault a politician working to preserve 2A rights, but repealing Pittman-Robertson for the cause seems counterintuitive.

Congressman Introduces Bill Repealing Pittman-Robertson | MeatEater Conservation (themeateater.com)

What do you think? I think the author is right in worrying that the alternate plan for wildlife funds won't hold a candle to what Pittman-Robertson has provided all these years. Pittman-Robertson was initiated by sportsmen in the first place and I've never heard or read a gunowner or hunter take this particular view of it.

[Danbo]

Can't fault a politician working to preserve 2A rights, but repealing Pittman-Robertson for the cause seems counterintuitive.

Congressman Introduces Bill Repealing Pittman-Robertson | MeatEater Conservation (themeateater.com)

What do you think? I think the author is right in worrying that the alternate plan for wildlife funds won't hold a candle to what Pittman-Robertson has provided all these years. Pittman-Robertson was initiated by sportsmen in the first place and I've never heard or read a gunowner or hunter take this particular view of it.

I don't think the congressman is thinking clearly, the Pittman Robertson act is great funding for wildlife conservation.
Th money is used for public land purchases, habitat improvement. Places that gun owners go to Hunt , target shoot , hike. ( yes some hikers carry firearms)

This reminds me of a congressman from Utah who was very popular until he wanted to sell millions of acres of public land.
He faced such a backlash, that he resigned shortly after.

He works fo Fox News now.

[FirstBubba]

We need to be cautious about repealing tax Acts!
Yes, we, as sportsmen (women?), have agreed to the PR Act.
No telling HOW much I've contributed to the PR Act. To the best of my knowledge, I've never hunted a property provided the PR Act.
Sooo... I've paid to allow OTHERS to play!
Point being, I really still don't mind mind paying the tax.
The folks that should be upset are "fishermen". The PR Act doesn't provide one red cent to their sport! 😥

As for the PR Act, Joe Schmoe who scrimps and saves that likes trap/ skeet or just pistol and rifle target shooting may never avail themselves of PR Act funded property.
Is it "fair" that their equipment is taxed to provide goodies to others?

[franchi20]

This looks like a case of unintended consequences. The case against the tax (surcharge, excise) makes some sense on face but, the result will be disastrous. The Act might stand in court if the the argument is made that it's voluntary.

[fitch270]

If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.🙄

[Milldawg]

[QUOTE=FirstBubba;n799328]We need to be cautious about repealing tax Acts!
Yes, we, as sportsmen (women?), have agreed to the PR Act.
No telling HOW much I've contributed to the PR Act. To the best of my knowledge, I've never hunted a property provided the PR Act.
Sooo... I've paid to allow OTHERS to play!
Point being, I really still don't mind mind paying the tax.
The folks that should be upset are "fishermen". The PR Act doesn't provide one red cent to their sport! 😥

As for the PR Act, Joe Schmoe who scrimps and saves that likes trap/ skeet or just pistol and rifle target shooting may never avail themselves of PR Act funded property.
Is it "fair" that their equipment is taxed to provide goodies to others?

If taxes were fair then what would the government have to do all year.

[Danbo]

We need to be cautious about repealing tax Acts!
Yes, we, as sportsmen (women?), have agreed to the PR Act.
No telling HOW much I've contributed to the PR Act. To the best of my knowledge, I've never hunted a property provided the PR Act.
Sooo... I've paid to allow OTHERS to play!
Point being, I really still don't mind mind paying the tax.
The folks that should be upset are "fishermen". The PR Act doesn't provide one red cent to their sport! 😥

As for the PR Act, Joe Schmoe who scrimps and saves that likes trap/ skeet or just pistol and rifle target shooting may never avail themselves of PR Act funded property.
Is it "fair" that their equipment is taxed to provide goodies to others?

I shoot Trap and never have heard a trap shooter complaining about the Pittman Robertson act.

As for fisherman, there is the Dingal / Johnson act.


Former Governor Patterson passed a law to close the pheasant farms so he could use the money for something else.( The funds were from Pittman)
NY conservation council sued him and won.

[fitch270]

P-R funds NY’s Hunter Ed program and also helps fund some shooting ranges.

https://www.nssf.org/wp-content/uplo...-factsheet.pdf

[FirstBubba]

Point being, danbo, I don't think I've ever heard ANYBODY complain about the PR Act.
I'd wager 95% or more hunters and shooters have NO idea what the PR Act is or what it does OR they're paying extra for their goodies! LOL!

Even as expensive as all firearms connected goods have become. I STILL wouldn't want PR repealed.

[FirstBubba]

You're right franchi20!
Sounds really good, on the face!
That's the game liberals LOVE to play!
Sounds real good, until you get down to the nitty Gritty! Then all the ugly comes out......and they are REALLY good at hiding it! 🤬

[rock rat]

PR funds pay for a lot of federal Wildlife Refuges, which have been opened up for hunting also though they often have registration and other restrictions which have kept me away. They also end up funding a good portion of our state division of wildlife though the biggest contributor is out of state elk tags.

Long as I'm mentioning it I'd like to see out of state elk tags go for the same as in state. Give everyone a chance at it, limit by lottery if they must but six hundred or more dollars is too much, that's three dollars a pound if you even get one.