America’s 1st freedom | San Jose gun control plans cause problems for gun owners
Photo credit: Anthony Quintano courtesy of Flickr
It was common to say, “So goes California, so is the nation.” These San Jose, California gun control proposals are examples of why people no longer use this saying.
The mayor of San Jose actually has a very long wishlist of gun control regulations he wants to pass, which includes the requirement for gun owners to carry liability insurance.
While the insurance mandate won’t be reviewed until this fall, San Jose City Council recently gave Mayor Sam Liccardo (D) an item on their gun control wishlist that is very Orwellian. : a mandate that all firearms purchases must be made by video and recorded audio!
The new law requires gun retailers within city limits to record all gun purchases with audio and video. It also requires that these records be kept for 30 days. As the NRA Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) explains, “Licensed firearms dealers are already heavily regulated, with California having some of the more stringent laws, in addition to existing federal laws and regulations. They also said, “The proposed ordinance will only add to the complexity and cost of running a small business, which in turn will be passed on to consumers.” Criminals will continue to bypass legal channels and benefit from California’s soft approach to crime. “
While commenting on the mayor’s liability insurance proposal, the NRA-ILA noted that it is “an attempt to punish law-abiding gun owners for owning a lawful product by making them pay for the activities of criminals. Taxing legal property and requiring insurance will do nothing to reduce the violence, which is often committed by repeat criminals who will not pay the fees or obtain insurance. It simply increases the cost for law-abiding citizens to exercise a constitutional right. “
Compulsory liability insurance for gun owners is not a new idea. It has been introduced about two dozen times in various state legislatures across the country without success. According to the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), firearms liability insurance plans have also made at least two appearances at the federal level, most recently in HR 127 by Representative Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), which was introduced earlier this year. An exhaustive list of gun controller ideas intended to gut the Second Amendment, HR 127 includes a requirement that all gun owners pay an annual “tax” of $ 800 to the federal government as a form of liability insurance. .
As noted by the NSSF, proponents of firearms liability insurance claim their idea “would provide insurance for victims of ‘gun violence’.”
However, although accidents involving firearms are already covered by most homeowners ‘or tenants’ insurance policies, it is unlikely that an insurance company will offer a policy to cover “gun violence”. . And, even if such policies existed, does anyone seriously believe that criminals – those who practice “gun violence” – would be in the liability insurance market?
The liability insurance requirement for law-abiding gun owners when there are no liability insurance policies and is not needed certainly looks like another roundabout form of gun control. fire. Hopefully, San Jose City Council will recognize this end of the race for what it is and reject the mistaken notion of Mayor Liccardo.