San Jose Gun-Control Plans Spell Trouble for Gun Owners

by
posted on June 27, 2021
** When you buy products through the links on our site, we may earn a commission that supports NRA's mission to protect, preserve and defend the Second Amendment. **
33272015914_d70758e0cf_k.jpg
Anthony Quintano courtesy Flickr

It used to be popular to say, “So goes California, so goes the nation.” These gun-control proposals out of San Jose, Calif., are examples of why people no longer use that saying.

The mayor of San Jose actually has a very long wish list of gun-control regulations he wants enacted, which includes requiring gun owners to buy liability insurance.

While the insurance mandate won’t be considered until this fall, the San Jose City Council did recently give Mayor Sam Liccardo (D) one item on his gun-control wish list that is very Orwellian: a mandate that all firearm purchases be video and audio recorded!

The new law requires gun retailers within city limits to record all firearms purchases with audio and video. It also requires that these records be kept for 30 days. As explained by the NRA Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA), “Licensed firearm dealers are already heavily regulated, with California having some of the most stringent laws, on top of existing federal laws and regulations.” They also stated, “The proposed ordinance will only add to the complexity and cost of operating a small business, which will, in turn, be passed on to consumers. Criminals will continue to bypass lawful channels and will benefit from California's soft-on-crime approach.”

While commenting on the mayor’s liability insurance proposal, NRA-ILA noted 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 lawful ownership and requiring insurance will do nothing to reduce violence, which is often committed by repeat criminals who will not be paying the fees or obtaining insurance. It simply increases the cost for law-abiding citizens to exercise a constitutional right.”

Mandating liability insurance for gun owners isn’t a new idea. It has been introduced about two dozen times in various state legislatures across the country, unsuccessfully. According to the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), firearms liability insurance schemes have also made at least two appearances at the federal level, most recently in Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee’s (D-Texas) H.R. 127, which was introduced earlier this year. A laundry list of gun-controller ideas meant to gut the Second Amendment, H.R. 127 includes a requirement that all gun owners would have to pay an $800 annual “tax” to the federal government as a form of liability insurance.

As the NSSF noted, gun-liability insurance proponents claim that their idea would “provide insurance for victims of ‘gun violence.’”

However, while accidents involving firearms are already covered under most people’s homeowner’s or renter’s insurance policies, it is unlikely any insurance company is going to offer a policy to cover “gun violence.” And, even if such polices existed, does anyone seriously believe that criminals—the ones who would be preforming the “gun violence”—would be in the market for liability insurance?

Mandating liability insurance for law-abiding gun owners when liability policies do not exist and is not needed sure sounds like yet another backdoor form of gun control. Hopefully, the San Jose City Council will recognize this end run for what it is and reject Mayor Liccardo’s misguided notion.

Latest

Holiday Gift Guide

The Trade Association for the Firearms Industry is Calling Out JPMorganChase

The CEO of JPMorganChase, Jamie Dimon, went on Fox News and claimed that JPMorganChase does not debank individuals, associations or corporations for ideological reasons. But the NSSF points out that Dimon has said different things before.

Gun Review | Rost Martin RM1C

I would like to introduce you to the Rost Martin RM1C—and yes, anyone familiar with the Glock 19 will immediately see its lineage. I nevertheless became intrigued by this gun, as I believe you might, thanks to some of its special features—and thanks to its price tag.

The NRA is Still Fighting for Our First Amendment Freedoms

Though the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 9-0 in favor of the NRA's argument in NRA v. Vullo, the decision sent the case back to a lower court, which ruled the offending government official had "qualified immunity." As a result, this case is ongoing.

Policing Should Not Be A Political Issue

Crime is a complicated topic, but there is an extremely simple rule that must be observed before one can begin to fight it effectively: One must genuinely wish to deal with the problem. Without such an elementary ambition, no amount of legislation, activity, taxpayer money or speechmaking will make the slightest bit of difference.

Gun-Control Group Inadvertently Admits Armed Citizens are Effective

The gun-control group Everytown inadvertently admitted that lawfully armed citizens stop a lot of crimes in America.



Get the best of America's 1st Freedom delivered to your inbox.