Heads up on proposed San Jose laws for gun owners - 1st in USA

[ilikegunspdx]

Historic Gun Ownership Law Could Go Into Effect Next Month

The San Jose City Council voted by wide margins on January 25 to adopt two gun control measures not found anywhere else in the United States. The first would require gun owners in the city to purchase liability insurance covering losses or damages related to “negligent or accidental use of the...

www.themeateater.com

Kind of reminds me of that city that briefly passed the $10,000 per day fine for unregistered (I think it was assault rifles). Can't remember where that was, somewhere back East.

Read More

 

[ma96782]

And some said it would/could never happen.


That being said, some people need to know (or learn) their history......


Aloha, Mark

 

[ma96782]

Your voice counts. Rrrrrright.......

While many of the comments sent to the council via email were not from San Jose residents, we weren't able to find a single comment supporting either ordinance. Looking at comments received via the council's e-comment system, 143 of the 145 messages opposed both measures outright. At the council meeting itself, an overwhelming majority of witnesses testified in opposition to the laws.
The council nonetheless voted 10-1 to impose an insurance requirement on gun owners and 8-3 to levy a fee. The council must hold one final vote to make the new regulations official, which will take place next month.

^taken from the article.

Aloha, Mark

 

[ma96782]

Politician(s) say, "We are only asking for reasonable and common-sense gun laws".

Common Sense? Gun control advocates often characterize their proposals as "common sense," but San Jose's new measures have been described as both unjust and impractical. Even putting legal questions aside (we'll get to those in a minute), forcing law-abiding gun owners to pay for the actions of criminals seems like the opposite of common sense to many Americans.

"The problem of criminal misuse of firearms must be addressed not by punishing those who abide by the law, but punishing those who break the law."

Eric Barloewen manages the firearms unit in a local crime laboratory in San Jose. He told the council that the "vast majority" of all gun-related crime is committed by individuals who are already prohibited from owning firearms.
"This proposed ordinance is simply an unfair tax to some of the city's population and will do nothing safety-related except drive good citizens out of our fine city of San Jose," he said.

^The quotes were taken from the article.



Aloha, Mark

 

[Nosferatu]

You know the left coast authoritarians in other states are watching this, frothing at the bit. If this passes there, it's only a matter of time before it infects the northern states.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

You know the left coast authoritarians in other states are watching this, frothing at the bit. If this passes there, it's only a matter of time before it infects the northern states.

Exactly. They never heard of a new law they didn't like.

They say "Ban ban ban. Regulate regulate regulate. Let's force everyone else to think like we do. Who cares about freedoms"

 

[sobo]

Never thought I'd hear myself say it, but mebbe those bois in the Hawaiian shirts ain't got such a crazy idea after all...

 

[dangerranger60]

By my best reading of the law, there is no penalty for non compliance. The first try had a $1000 fine. But the latest try doesn't seem to have any penalty. DR

 

[billdeserthills]

By my best reading of the law, there is no penalty for non compliance. The first try had a $1000 fine. But the latest try doesn't seem to have any penalty. DR

Good news, you just know they would hate to see gun toting felons get in trouble