Meanwhile - 
Posted on 01/25/2022 5:31:54 PM PST by MAGA2017
(CNN)San Jose, California, is getting closer to adopting a first-in-the-nation law to address gun violence by requiring all gun owners to pay a fee and carry liability insurance.
The Silicon Valley city's council is due to vote Tuesday on the ordinance, whose dual-pronged approach aims to reduce the risk of gun harm by incentivizing safer behavior and to ease taxpayers of the financial burden of gun violence.
"Certainly the Second Amendment protects every citizen's right to own a gun. It does not require taxpayers to subsidize that right," Democratic Mayor Sam Liccardo said Monday at a news conference, estimating that San Jose residents incur about $442 million in gun-related costs each year. Mass shootings have impelled Liccardo to push the fee and insurance measures -- first after the 2019 slayings at a festival in nearby Gilroy, California, then following last year's deadly siege at public transit facility in his city. The mayor has compared the plan to car insurance mandates, which he credits with dramatically reducing traffic fatalities.
San Jose city council after the June mass shooting unanimously approved drafting the ordinance, mayoral spokesperson Rachel Davis said Monday in a news release. If it's approved Tuesday and on second reading February 8, it would take effect August 8.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Street gang members exempt.
I hope they pass it and the courts shoot it down hard.
I know that’s risky. But if they don’t try it someone else will. And it is better to have the precedent’s on the books. As long as the precedents go the right way.
No different than a poll tax or “first amendment license”.
I can’t say what to do to the City Council, or I’d get banned, and have the FBI knockin’ on my doorbell at 6:00 AM tomorrow with CNN in tow.
Can’t you just see all the criminals signing up for insurance and permission to own firearms?
Another stupid, senseless attempt by the occupation government to disarm law abiding citizens.
Antifa and BLM get a pass on this one; no need to comply. As if they would...
How many San Joseians actually own firearms. The town is as lib as it can get.
Prima facie infringement.
Shall. Not. Be. Infringed!
Criminals could not care less. This will only affect law-abiding citizens.
It’s remarkable. I live in an area where household gun ownership is likely very near 100%. We have zero gun violence. San Jose must have some sort of problem. It’s not a gun problem.
The lawyers will have a field day suing the city. Such infringement is as clearly unconstitutional as a poll tax.
Pay a fee has already lost in the courts. However, liability insurance might have a possibility if it was very carefully crafted. Most of these crafts would fail, but some might survive. This is *solely* because of the stupidly complex nature of liability law. Especially in California.
How would they know I owned a firearm?
Form 4473? I could say that I sold it, lost it in a boating accident, etc.
Are they going to make it a felony to not have insurance? Insurance against what exactly? Secondly, what company would want to indemnify such? Also, lets assume that my insurance gets cancelled for whatever reason, then what? Do they expect me to surrender my firearm? Are they going to kick down my door to confiscate?
There are nine houses on the street where I live. The average lot size is 25 acres or so. I estimate there are 200-300 privately owned firearms among us. It’s legal to shoot in the back yards and in a few of the front yards.
So far we haven’t shot anybody.
Illegals.
A “fee” for the CONSTITUTIONAL right to keep and bear arms? Somebody’s going to the big house.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.