What's behind the surge in women gun owners?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Gun sales are booming, and women are a big part of the reason why.
The Daily Beast reports on the National Rifle Association getting in touch with its feminine side at its annual convention. Companies sell all sort of things: pink firearms, guns that are small enough to fit in a small purse, black and pink shooting targets and even a bra holster.
As the inventor of the Flashbang Women's Holster tells The Daily Beast: "Nothing comes between a girl and her gun."
Of course if you're carrying a gun there, you want to be doubly sure the safety is on. The National Sporting Goods Association says nearly 47% more women are shooting today compared with 10 years ago, and a Gallup Poll last year found almost one in four American women own at least one gun.
The number of women at NRA shooting clinics has skyrocketed in the last decade. Gun ranges hold ladies' nights and enrollment in one women's conceal-carry class in Oklahoma is reportedly up 400%.
Female gun enthusiasts give different reasons for the spike in ownership. Some cite security while others say it's an extension of gender equality. The NRA denies it's going after women over any other demographic group. They say they want everyone to be a member of the NRA.
Overall, gun sales are way up in the U.S., with big profits for gun makers such as Smith & Wesson.
Some say the trend is because of fears of a second Obama term and a potential tightening on gun restrictions. Others say a weaker economy makes people feel unsafe.
Here’s my question to you: What's behind the surge in women gun owners?
Tune in to the Situation Room at 4pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.
And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.
What's the point of the Buffett Rule if most millionaires already pay higher effective tax rates than almost everyone else?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
As the Senate debates the Buffett Rule - guess what?
Most millionaires are already paying higher effective tax rates than almost everyone else.
Named after billionaire Warren Buffett, the proposal would mean millionaires pay at least 30% of their income in federal taxes.
But CNN Money reports that while many millionaires pay an effective rate of less than 30%, they still pay a higher percentage than most others.
For example, the tax policy center estimates that counting federal income and payroll taxes, the average effective federal tax rate for people making between $40,000 and $50,000 was 12% last year.
Those making more than $1 million pay more than 20%.
The difference is even bigger if you look only at income tax liability. Middle income groups have an effective tax rate of 3.2% while millionaires pay 18.9%.
Sort of throws cold water on President Obama's argument that the Buffett Rule would be some sort of exercise in fairness.
Under the current rules, a highly paid executive would be taxed at 35% while a millionaire who earns the majority of his income from investments would be taxed at 15% on long-term capital gains and dividends.
The White House argues that the Buffett Rule is aimed at millionaires who can structure their income to minimize their taxes - you know, people like Mitt Romney.
Also, it's worth noting while the Obama Administration runs annual deficits of more than $1 trillion, the Buffett Rule would add less than $5 billion per year to the national treasury. Chump change.
Here’s my question to you: What's the point of the Buffett Rule if most millionaires already pay higher effective tax rates than almost everyone else?
Tune in to the Situation Room at 5pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.
And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.
@jackcafferty on Twitter
Recent Comments