What's so great about sin taxes? If you don't know what a sin tax is, that's when the government attaches a punitive and expensive tax on something under the guise of trying to convince the general public that they should no longer engage in that activity. Examples of sin taxes are cigarette taxes, alcohol taxes, and yes, gasoline taxes.

Of course, these taxes don't really discourage users from continuing their activities. How many people do you know who quit smoking because they couldn't afford the tax on a pack of cigarettes? Do you know people who stopped consuming beer because they couldn't afford the tax on a six-pack? When gas was $3.00-plus per gallon, we tried to reduce the amount of our driving, but did we stop driving?

Your government is fully aware of this, too. Our elected officials may be many things, but they're not stupid. Or, at least a majority of them aren't. But, they don't always think these things through to the end-result. They're more interested in thinking that they're going to accomplish something that will be good for society, not harmful to it.

Chicago is suffering from a massive budget deficit. One Cook County lawmaker, Commissioner Roberto Maldanado, just proposed a 10-cent per bullet sin tax this past week. It is estimated that if every citizen of Cook County purchased just one bullet each, it would raise $530,368 ( http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/248646,CST-NWS-ammo08.article) for their massive budget shortfall. While I realize that Cook County is not in Colorado, I also understand that "good ideas" seem to move from state to state. Colorado could be next at anytime, particularly when one keeps in mind that Democrats run the legislature and the governor's mansion.

Of course, not every citizen is going to purchase a box of bullets. And, as someone who enjoys hunting and shooting sports, I'm going to tell you that you cannot buy a bullet one at a time, not even if you're Barney Fife. It would be like trying to purchase a single cigarette at a time (No thank you, Mr. Store Clerk, I don't need twenty cigarettes, I only need one. Could you please break down that pack for me? Thank you.).

Bullets normally come in boxes of twenty or fifty, depending on the caliber. Shotgun shells typically come in boxes of five, ten and twenty-five. Of course, there are some variations, and you can even purchase 22-long rifle ammunition in boxes of 500-plus. A box of twenty costs the shopper $2.00 extra, a box of fifty, $5.00 extra. That may not seem like a lot on the surface, and you might think to yourself, "Hey, that's not terrible. I could support this."

But, why not look at the actual cost of a box of bullets first. The person who wants to shoot a box of shotgun shells at the range pays $3.50 for the box of shells and $2.50 for the special bullet tax. That's a 71% tax on the box of shotgun shells. The person who wants to keep his or her family safe by going to the shooting range and practicing with his or her firearm pays $15.00 for a box of 50 bullets. The tax is $5.00, or a 33% tax. That 500-bullet box (called a brick) of 22-long rifle ammunition costs $10.00 on average. A 10-cent per bullet tax means that it would an extra $50.00, or a whopping 500% tax!

Back in 1773, some people in Boston threw a few buckets of tea into the ocean for less than that. I'm sure you're familiar with the rest of the story.

I'm positive that Commissioner Maldanado's intent is to make shooting so expensive that people will reduce their purchases of bullets, or even eliminate them altogether. He probably believes that this will make Chicago a safer society. But, what Commissioner Maldanado doesn't realize is that his proposed tax is actually harmful to society. And, all gun-banners should understand why this type of tax is harmful to society.

Practicing hones your skills and keeps you at the top of your game. This is why, for instance, the Denver Broncos don't just play football once a week and then go home and lollygag for the other six days. Mike Shanahan keeps the Broncos on the field all week long, where they practice, practice, practice.

A responsible gun owner, too, must always practice his or her skill in order to remain at the top of the game. The hunter doesn't just show up in the field with a shotgun and hope to hit his or her prey. The hunter is at the trap range or sporting clays range on a regular basis, shooting at clay discs (called pigeons or birds) in order to hone his or her skills. He or she is at the rifle range, shooting at paper targets 100 or more yards out, making sure that everything is in working order and fine-tuning skills.

The responsible person who has a handgun for self-defense is also at the range often. He or she is shooting paper targets, making sure that he or she can hit what is aimed at and not anything else. He or she might practice a quick draw to see how fast response time is and what changes must be made to accurately hit the target.

Now, make ammunition quite unaffordable by slapping on unfair and punitive sin taxes, and what happens? The hunter is at the range far less often than he or she should be. When out in the field, he or she either misses the target completely (and thus, an errant bullet will hit something else) or the animal isn't killed cleanly and is instead injured. And, the person using a gun for defensive purposes doesn't go to the range to practice, and when in a dangerous situation, he or she misses and instead of the criminal being injured or killed, the victim winds up on a marble slab (and don't forget where the victim's bullet went).

So, what exactly has been accomplished? Is society safer by imposing a punitive tax on bullets, or has the opposite occurred?