San Jose passes first U.S. law requiring gun owners to get liability insurance and pay annual fee
Categories
San Jose passes first U.S. law requiring gun owners to get liability insurance and pay annual fee
San Jose passes first U.S. law requiring gun owners to get liability insurance and pay annual fee
26 replies on “San Jose passes first U.S. law requiring gun owners to get liability insurance and pay annual fee”
I hope San Jose residents enjoy their tax money going to fight the upcoming lawsuit where they lose badly due to this being a well established unconstitutional principle the Supreme Court has already ruled on.
Sounds like a way to try to prevent the poor from accessing a means of self defense.
Personally, I feel like this is a poor tax designed to disarm disadvantaged individuals
How does this fight actual gun crime? This just punishes the lawful citizens and has no impact for the guns sold on the street.
Yeah, that will get struck down.
So we’re giving insurance companies more money now?
I wonder how much insurance companies paid San Jose politicians to pass that law.
Interestingly, the comment period for the bill would seem to indicate that among the interested voting public, the measure is [wildly unpopular](https://mobile.twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1485678651890880512).
Off to the Supreme Court.
So we the people would have this restriction but police don’t? Last I heard LEO don’t need personal liability insurance, so then why do we the people.
Would be nice if police officers had to do this and their rates based on complaints from the general public.
Waste of money for political grandstanding. It’s something like 90 percent of guns used in the commission of a crime are stolen. So this will have no effect on crime or gun violence.
So gun ownership remains easy for the wealthy and far more difficult for people on the lower side of the fiscal spectrum. Who are disproportionately Black and Brown. And this is good?? Does not sound like it.
“gun owners who don’t have insurance won’t lose their guns or face any criminal charges”
So why fucking bother
“However, gun owners who don’t have insurance won’t lose their guns or face any criminal charges, the mayor said.”
So, it’s not required, and pointless?
So we are disarming the poor now as well
Nice! Allow rich people to carry, but poor people are out of luck! Sounds like a well thought out and fair law, with no hint of classism! /s
So the next mass shooter better have liability insurance or big legal problems!!!
The people who passed this crap know it’s unconstitutional but do it anyway.
There really should be consequences for intentionally wasting the court’s time and taxpayer money.
What if you refuse? Can they strip you of your arms? I’m left- leaning, but this crap is blatantly violating 2A.
Hey look another law to stop the minorities from attaining guns.
I bet a lot of boating accidents happen soon
Great idea – that means when criminals murder me I can file a claim against their insurance and get paid, just like a car accident.
This will totally work.
Why do people keep assuming criminals will obey laws. Forcing insurance on gun owners won’t help anything other than assisting our culture to acclimate to unnecessary authoritarian control. This is money grabbers trying to use the public fear to line their pockets. Has nothing to do with safety.
What a waste of time and money. I guess the city decided lawyers weren’t being paid enough.
So the poors can’t own guns?