I know that most of us are looking at candidates opinions on gun ownership, but when it comes down to it...what is really more important to you...

Lower (lowest possible) taxes

or

Less restrictive gun laws?

A lot of the answer will depend on the state you live in.
If you are in CA or NJ or NY, the federal position on gun laws would appear irrelevant since your states retain their own more restrictive laws in favor of the federal ones. In that case, the presidents position is meaningless. That being the case, in those places, taxes might be a bigger concern. In places where we are accustomed to owning and carrying pretty much what we want, the idea that someone could come in and change that would piss us off.

Think about how close the last few elections have been. Now consider those red/blue maps we all saw. The overwhelming majority of the land mass votes republican. Still, the elections are extrememly close. So what does that tell you? It tells me that the major cities (where the population density is greatest) is the key to sealing the deal on a conservative candidate. If conservatives were able to somehow take even 1/4 of the city votes, the election now becomes a landslide victory. Where are the biggest cities? In the same places where the federal gun laws wont matter, and in the same places where the liberals live....the states where folks might be more interested in tax cuts.

If a republican can show a record of tax cuts and still have a record of successful financial policy, then offer tax cuts (or at the least, some well thought out tax incentives) to those in the cities of America....its a win win for us.

I try not to bitch about taxes. When I compare what I pay to folks I know in Europe, I have a good deal. But it seems that every year I owe more an more....and frankly I am sick of bankrolling those less inclined to get decent jobs and support themselves.

In true ARFCOM fashion, I want and expect to 'get both' - lower taxes & less BS gun regulations.
If given the choice, I suppose I would take my guns over my money....wealth without freedom wont remain in ones ownership for very long. A means to protect oneself is a hell of a lot more important that a few bucks in the bank. Considering the rise in firearm & ammo prices in the last 20 years, its pretty obvious to me that we all choose to take our guns over those extra dollars...at least that is what the market would seem to indicate.

Given the choice of just one....which is it.....your money or your guns?

The government will need to seriously cut its rampant spending before lowering taxes will be feasible.  If both of those things could happen then I'd care more about that than relaxing gun laws (for now).

Both!

there is a reason we have a 2nd, and that's so we can be concerned about [things like] taxes and not have to worry about the government stepping all over our rkba.

unfortunately, the government doesn't give a crap about stepping on our rights even though they are legally obligated to NOT do so. as such, you can bet the farm that taxes will go up too, since they can't get into any legal problems there.

Arfcom answer: Everyone says "hands off my guns"

Meatspace answer: Everyone says "lower taxes"

What the Hell is meatspace?

Illegal immigration!
But of the two choices, it would be the guns. A side benefit is lower taxes.

I am a one issue voter and I vote second amendment every time.

Quoted: What the Hell is meatspace?

If online is virtual ("cyberspace"), then the real world is "meatspace"

Hey, I didn't make it up, I just get a kick out of it!

lower taxes ON guns





roy d....or pay your taxes, get a free gun!!!

Can't we use guns to lower taxes?

Quoted: lower taxes ON guns roy d....or pay your taxes, get a free gun!!!

Or how about ammo credits for paying taxes. Next time the liberals want to raise taxes, they'll give everyone in the country more ammunition. Along with the free ammunition would come increased gun ownership to use the ammunition. Then let's see what the liberals want more: Less guns or more taxes.

Most candidates that are pro 2nd Ammnt are usually for low taxes.
BTW...I voted hands off me weapons matey!

Quoted: Quoted: What the Hell is meatspace? If online is virtual ("cyberspace"), then the real world is "meatspace" Hey, I didn't make it up, I just get a kick out of it!

Weapons.

When a democrat proposes a tax cut, it is a good thing... when a republican proposes a tax cut - it is bad, evil and only designed to keep the poor people down and make the rich white fuckers even richer!

Oh, wait... a democrat that proposed a tax cut?? What the hell was I thinking??!! Dayam.... I better quit smokin' that ditch weed!

Quoted: Illegal immigration! But of the two choices, it would be the guns. A side benefit is lower taxes.

Ill second that!

Quoted: Both!

+ a brazillian  

SECURE THE GODDAMN BORDER AND DEPORT ALL ILLEGAL ALIENS!!!!!

Don't know about you, but I don't mind taxes.


And, I'd much rather have freedom of the 2nd Amendment.

Quoted: SECURE THE GODDAMN BORDER AND DEPORT ALL ILLEGAL ALIENS!!!!!

Please, someone get this man in the White House.

I agree 110%.

If you have no guns, you can't stop them from taking ALL your money for taxes.

Quoted: SECURE THE GODDAMN BORDER AND DEPORT ALL ILLEGAL ALIENS!!!!!

Hmmmm....let's see....yup.  I don't even live in a border state and that sums it up for me 100%.  It is the single, paramount, all consuming issue.  Everything else takes a back seat.  EVERYTHING.

Both, however having the best gunlaws isn't going to be worth a shit if they tax us into a economic downturn that is so bad that we must sell off our guns.  There are also other issues to be weighed as well.  

National Militia [andrew jackson] First Inaugural Address, March 4 1829 Andrew Jackson Considering standing armies as dangerous to free governments in time of peace, I shall not seek to enlarge our present establishment, nor disregard that salutary lesson of political experience which teaches that the military should be held subordinate to the civil power. The gradual increase of our Navy, whose flag has displayed in distant climes our skill in naviagaion and our fame in arms; the preservation of our forts, arsenals, and dockyards, and the introduction of progressive improvements in the discipline and science of both branches of our military service are so plainly prescribed by prudence that I should be excused for omitting their mention sooner than for enlarging on their importance. But the bulwark of our defense is the national militia, which in the present state of our intelligence and population must render us invincible. As long as our Government is administered for the good of the people, and is regulated by their will; as long as it secures to us the rights of person and of property, liberty of conscience and of the press, it will be worth defending; and so long as it is worth defending a patriotic militia will cover it with an impenetrable aegis. Partial injuries and occasional mortifications we may be subjected to, but a million of armed freemen, possessed of the means of war, can never be conquered by a foreign foe. To any just system, therefore, calculated to strengthen this natural safeguard of the country I shall cheerfully lend all the aid in my power.

Neither !  The most important issue in the near future is the security of this country.  We need to close the borders and get a much more strict immigration policy.  And most of all we need a leadership which recognizes the most dangerous threat we face - Islam.  Muslim ideology will be the driving force behind world tensions in the foreseeable future.  

With the debt we already have, and the continuing cost of defense, lowering taxes will not be doable.   Second Amendment issues are certainly important, and I hope whomever is next in the White House understands how firearms ownership can contribute to the national defense.  But the broader world view is even more important.