City Council
Meeting Time: 01-25-22 13:16
eComments Report
Meetings Meeting
Time
Agenda
Items
Comments Support Oppose Neutral
City Council 01-25-22
13:16
79 1230 5 1174 11
Sentiments for All Meetings
The following graphs display sentiments for comments that have location data. Only locations of users who have commented will be shown.
Overall Sentiment
City Council
01-25-22 13:16
Agenda Name Comments Support Oppose Neutral
22-007 Closed Session Agenda 4 0 4 0
Deleted Agenda Item 820 3 777 10
4. PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES 261 1 250 1
4.1 22-045 Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance. - TO BE HEARD AT 6:00 P .M.
145 1 143 0
Sentiments for All Agenda Items
The following graphs display sentiments for comments that have location data. Only locations of users who have commented will be shown.
Overall Sentiment
Agenda Item: eComments for 22-007 Closed Session Agenda Overall Sentiment
Paul Burt
Location: 95123, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:38am 01-25-22
Recidivism - Therein lies the problem.
https://icjia.illinois.gov/researchhub/articles/examining-the-recidivism-of-firearm-offenders-using-state-criminal- history-and-mortality-data
Karen Morgan
Location:
Submitted At: 9:09am 01-25-22
This will make law abiding citizens become unlawful citizens. If a gun is stolen and used to commit a crime is the reg. owner responsible for an ins. claim? If so, is the penalty to bar the owner from having a gun? If an intruder gets a homeowners gun and shoots the homeowner does the homeowner sue his own insurance? Does he still get barred from owning another? Y ou should be cracking down on CRIMINALS who don't vote instead of restrictions on law abiding (and voting) citizens.
Rahul Sharma
Location:
Submitted At: 11:36am 01-24-22
4. PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance
If you can't see the irony in a gun tax, enforced by men with guns, then you fail to understand why the second amendment was written in the first place
Eric Barloewen
Location: 95118, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:02am 01-24-22
4. PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance
This ordinance is not fair to law abiding gun owners. I manage the Firearms unit in the local crime laboratory and the vast majority of all gun related crime is done 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. Respectfully submitted.
Agenda Item: eComments for Deleted Agenda Item
Overall Sentiment
Mark Lee
Location:
Submitted At: 3:10pm 01-21-22
Solve gun violence and all violence by getting criminals off the streets.
Guns like knives, cars or baseball bats are tools of violent offenders not the cause of the violence.
Taxing law abiding citizens based on what personal property they own is nonsense.
Stop the assault on law abiding firearms owners.
ML
Edward Hearne
Location: 89121-2511, Las Vegas
Submitted At: 3:00pm 01-21-22
I am totally opposed to this bill and will do everything I can to fight it Karen Buckner
Location: 33617, Tampa
Submitted At: 2:31pm 01-21-22
Good evening! I am asking that you please vote against this tax that has the potential of promoting gun control.
Thank you very much for your consideration! _
Michele Tracy
Location: 92567, Nuevo
Submitted At: 2:14pm 01-21-22
This ordinance is unconstitutional and will do nothing but waste taxpayer money to line lawyers pockets. What is next, taxing all car owners to fight drunk driving? What you are proposing is no different and is just as ridiculous.
Grant Pearson
Location:
Submitted At: 2:07pm 01-21-22
Agenda Item 4.1 22-045 Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance
As mentioned in the Declaration of Independence the purpose of government is to secure our rights.
Please do not violate the oath you have take to the Constitution. Please stand up and do what is right... protect our rights and vote NO on an Gun Reduction Ordinance. Guns are not the problem. Bad people are the problem.
Do not punish the innocent.
Thanks!
Floyd Collier
Location: 85653, Marana
Submitted At: 1:49pm 01-21-22
Do not pass an unconstitutional law that taxes a constitutional right.
John Royer
Location: 16046-9314, Mars
Submitted At: 1:24pm 01-21-22
This is an unconstitutional law that you are passing for the citizens of San Jose. Y ou will then use the tax money that you collect from us to defend yourself in court knowing that this is unconstitutional. That is basically theft of the city of San Jose from the citizens of San Jose. Vote this down Dariusz Orzolek
Location: 06051
Submitted At: 12:50pm 01-21-22
This is an unconstitutional law that you are passing for the citizens of San Jose. Y ou will then use the tax money that you collect from us to defend yourself in court knowing that this is unconstitutional. That is basically theft of the city of San Jose from the citizens of San Jose. Vote this down Gabriel Gaitan
Location: 78521, Brownsville
Submitted At: 12:35pm 01-21-22
Criminals are the ones committing crimes. However, implementing liability insurance and a gun tax does not solve the problem in the long term. This is only destroying the ability for law-abiding citizens to exercise their right to keep and bear arms in accordance with the Second Amendment. Just like any other law, it can be abused in one way or another to get results. I urge you to reject this strategy immediately.
Chris Giangreco
Location: 95117, San Jose
Submitted At: 12:25pm 01-21-22
The mayor and each councilmember swore to uphold the constitution by taking/signing their oath of office. 2nd Amendment Foundation, NRA, GOC, CRPA, have all stated that if passed, it will be fought in the courts on the grounds that it violates constitutional rights. City council has been warned of this. Court findings of unconstitutionality will validate Oath of Office violations. Any yes voters should voluntarily resign from office or be thrown out by San Jose residents. Biggest POSbySJCC-EVER David Votethisdown
Location: 95124, San jose
Submitted At: 12:17pm 01-21-22
This is an unconstitutional law that you are passing for the citizens of San Jose. Y ou will then use the tax money that you collect from us to defend yourself in court knowing that this is unconstitutional. That is basically theft of the city of San Jose from the citizens of San Jose. Vote this down Dustin Granger
Location: 70358, Grand Isle
Submitted At: 12:13pm 01-21-22
Passing a gun ownership tax places an undue burden on the second amendment rights of American citizens, which is hard enough to exercise with inflation driving up the price of merchandise all across the nation. Also, if the information about who is paying the tax is databased(it probably will be), that effectively creates a gun registry. Gun Registration throughout history has always been the precursor to Gun Confiscation. If passed it will trigger protest.
Sincerely, Dustin Carl Granger
Richard McNeese
Location: 43138, Loan
Submitted At: 11:57am 01-21-22
Thankfully I am not near your jurisdiction where common sense is lacking. This is a losing issue for you and your constituents. Y ou, because this will be the beginning of a long series of lawsuits which you will lose. These tactics have been tried elsewhere and failed in the courts. Y our constituents lose because they will foot the bill for your foolhardiness.
Y ou should recognize gun ownership is becoming a necessity for Americans since cities don’t imprison the criminal.
For Liberty, Richard
Richard Mutch
Location: 92071, Santee
Submitted At: 11:53am 01-21-22
QUESTION: How is the City of San Jose going to tax all the illegal gun owners, ie; gangs, armed looters, murderers? There goes a large amount of lost revenue. Once again a display of the "legals" paying for the "illegals."
A Bureaucratic Solution to a Bureaucratic Situation brought about by Bureaucratic Stupidity - BS, BS, BS! It's a POLL TAX! If I can't pay the tax; I don't get to ("vote" by buying a Tool-Of-Defense to) defend me-&-mine.
How Jim Crow can you get??
Samuel Cook
Location: 98815, Cashmere
Submitted At: 11:50am 01-21-22
We
all know this is just another attempt to chip away at our second amendment rights to defend our family and prope rty not only from
criminal intent but also a tyrannical Federal, State and local government. We the People are not sheep and will n ot tolerate a runaway
government that no longer listens to its voters whether we share the same political ideology or not. Y ou were put i n your position of
leadership to represent ALL constituents, not just those that share your personal beliefs.
Ben Kudon
Location: 90608, Whittier
Submitted At: 11:15am 01-21-22
These ridiculous laws being drafted by politicians intent on infringing basic constitutional rights do nothing to decrease crime. Look at the stats, look at Los Angeles. Support police and their efforts to decrease crime and get these leftist non-functioning DA's out of office and then watch the crime decrease. All without subverting the Bill of Rights or criminalizing everyday voting law abiding American citizens.
Jeff Schara
Location: 54401, Wausau
Submitted At: 11:09am 01-21-22
This is nothing more than a tax on law abiding citizens and is completely wrong. There is no reason that citizens who legally obtain guns should be punished for the actions of criminals. I do believe this is way to create a gun registry and I oppose this action. I demand that you leave our 2nd amendment rights alone. Punish criminals NOT patriots!
Lance Valdespino
Location: 85255, Scottsdale
Submitted At: 10:54am 01-21-22
This tax is most definitely an attempt to get guns registered.
George Anderson
Location: 95126-2022, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:44am 01-21-22
It may help file a Class Action Suit for violating Our right to bare arms William Kumler
Location: 95130, SAN JOSE
Submitted At: 10:35am 01-21-22
This unconstitutional tax on lawful gun owners must be forbidden. There is no reason that citizens who LAWFULL Y own guns should be responsible for the actions of criminals who obtain guns through nefarious means. There is something seriously wrong with your thought-processes if you honestly believe this is a just or even fair "tax". I vehemently oppose this action and suggest that you take another read of the United States Constitution.
Stan Barker
Location:
Submitted At: 10:18am 01-21-22
I'm pretty sure no criminals with illegal guns will be signing up for your tax and gun registry....I think you know that also. So how does this address crime? Illegal drugs are smuggled in every day, and illegal guns owned by criminals will be the only guns, other than police, that are out there if you have your way with the Second Amendment of our Constitution
Yosef Baras
Location: 18704, Kingston
Submitted At: 9:57am 01-21-22
The second amendment right shall not be infringed.
Jim Verbeerst
Location: 92675, San Juan Capistrano
Submitted At: 9:55am 01-21-22
This is again a well-intentioned ordinance, but one that doesn't really go to the heart of the problem. All of the statistics quoted in the beginning of the ordinance do not distinguish between gun accidents & deaths with legally owned guns vs. illegally gotten firearms. With violent crime escalating out of control in the US the need for gun ownership is obvious. Stop trying to hamper it! Create legislation that can prevent the use of illegally gotten guns.
James Stewart
Location: 80525-9323, Fort Collins
Submitted At: 9:49am 01-21-22
There are more than enough Gun laws if they were enforced. Punish the criminal and quit turning the Criminals loose instead.
John Rowland
Location:
Submitted At: 9:44am 01-21-22
4.1 22-045 Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance. Taxing law abiding citizens is NOT the way to reduce violence.
Focus on holding the criminals accountable for their actions and behavior, hold the District Attorney accountable in making sure criminals are brought to justice, stop punishing the tax payers and law abiding citizen and START holding criminal accountable. Only then can you beging to reduce violence on our streets. Oppose oppose oppose!
Michael McAmis
Location: 92870, Placentia
Submitted At: 9:29am 01-21-22
Be hard on crime. Punish criminals not law abiding citizens.
David Crothers
Location: 95490, Willits
Submitted At: 9:15am 01-21-22
Stop the insanity, Deal with the criminals who commit these crimes, Those ill-gotten taxes will fund an illegal defense the city knows it will lose, Y es they will tax their own residence to pay for an illegal bill baited with taking away the rights of those very same resident. Start executing and locking away the Criminals,and Stop punishing law-abiding people. Why are the politicians of California trying to turn this state into a communist state? Stop the insanity.
Bruce Hachtmann
Location: 95046, San Martin
Submitted At: 9:05am 01-21-22
This is BAD BAD BAD. Y ou cannot decide that the second amendment isnt for San Jose residents, and impose some sort of insurance tax on you citizens for using their rights! Y ou have gone too far already. I know that I will donate time and money to see every one of you taken from office if you proceed with this foolishness.
Steve Fasolis
Location:
Submitted At: 8:55am 01-21-22
Taxing law abiding gun owners won’t make gun violence go away …. But you know that.
Putting those in prison for using a gun to commit a crime is the best step towards that. But that you don’t understand .. why?
David Edrington
Location:
Submitted At: 8:44am 01-21-22
The constitution of the United States of America was designed to protect YOU from an oppressive government.
Do not partner with oppression. Stand with us. Stand with FREEDOM.
John Rowell
Location: 97845, John Day
Submitted At: 8:21am 01-21-22
Guns do not kill people! Never seen a gun, knife, baseball bat, or a car that jumped up and kill anyone yet.
There are a lot of bad folks out there that can make a weapon out of most anything if they want too. It is lawless people that kill! It is the lack of will of the people to enforce the laws. Why should I or you have to give up our rights? Oh, I forgot this is about the control of the citizens. The government should fear its people, not the people fearing their government.
Mark Cocklin
Location: 44662, Navarre
Submitted At: 8:03am 01-21-22
This is the first step. Disarm law abiding citizens, turn them into sheep who rely on the government to tell them what to do, how to act and if they don't, well now you don't have to worry because they aren't able to defend themselves from their own government. This is the only reason this country has never been invaded by a foreign country. Next you'll want to tax speech. This is ridiculous.
J S
Location:
Submitted At: 7:57am 01-21-22
Y our proposal is not Constitutional and a bill of rights violation. Tax payers money will be lost and wasted when you ultimately lose in court. Go after criminals and other human parasites.
William Cannon
Location: 34698, Dunedin
Submitted At: 7:51am 01-21-22
how about we tax anti American and un Constitutional acts attempted by moronic, Bloomberg bribed, closeted communist wanna be dictator dumbocrats? How would that work out fer ya, Sunshine? A tax on "stupidspeech"....yea...I think that's a great idea! Pay up, democrats! Y er all gonna go broke now......
Leave the Second alone, snowflakes, cause some day YOU are gonna need it, ya friggin cretins.
Timothy Smith
Location: 44077, Fairport Harbor
Submitted At: 7:36am 01-21-22
"We the People" have God given Right to bare arm: legal Americans.
Y ou are making the mistake many nations have made before you. Adolf Hitler, Mao Zedong, Mussolini, Stalin, Castro, killed millions after disarming them they were slaughtered. All the power is from "We the People" Remember that today before you make this huge mistake. They all killed the people who helped them take control at first. They killed the politicians and the professors with firearms. Now your ignorance is no excuse.
Frederick Bartels
Location: 81523, Glade Park
Submitted At: 7:30am 01-21-22
Taxing Americans for gun ownership is a communist move. It's unconstitutional. It burdens gun owners unjustly, which tends to push them into abandoning their guns to save tax dollars. It's also a backdoor approach to a gun registery. Furthermore, what's to stop anti-gun politicians from raising gun taxes each year? We've see what happened in Australia in terms of an unarmed and helpless populous.
David Weaver
Location: 95112, San Jose
Submitted At: 7:30am 01-21-22
This ordinance is OUTRAGEOUS.
-- 95% of guns used in crimes are obtained *illegally*; this tax is like taxing good drivers to pay for drunk drivers' damages
-- its passage will cost the city millions of $ to fight years of legal battles that will ultimately be lost (unconstitutional).
To reduce violent crime:
-- PROSECUTE violent criminals vigorously
-- keep violent criminals locked up for their full prison terms! -- do NOT persecute law-abiding citizens (those who legally own firearms) Robert Steffy
Location: 17532, Holtwood
Submitted At: 6:59am 01-21-22
It is un-American to penalize law abiding citizens for something that they legally bought and own. What’s next, butter knives? More people are killed and injured with knives than guns. Politicians are high on having power over the people, we must stop this anti-American assault on “ We The People” that run this country.
Shelly Bartels
Location: 81523, Glade Park
Submitted At: 6:53am 01-21-22
There are plenty of taxes. There is no need to tax guns!!! Y ou are just trying to get a registry of gun owners and that is illegal.
Stuart Warneck
Location: 91604, Studio City
Submitted At: 5:43am 01-21-22
It just wrong!
Ardie Kissinger
Location: 17815-9761, Bloomsburg
Submitted At: 5:35am 01-21-22
I faced reality a long time ago. This is not about making 'things' safer, it's all about control.... government control over the people. Those who attempt to usurp that control need to be held accountable and until that happens this type of senseless bureaucratic initiatives under the camouflage of 'doing good' will continue.
Liam Howell
Location:
Submitted At: 4:39am 01-21-22
The fact that you would even dare propose such an ordinance is a disgrace. Y ou not only trample on inseparable rights but also try to mask it as a “good thing” . Focus on what really matters the criminals in the community that are breaking the laws not the law abiding adhering to their 2nd amendment rights.
John Dunkin
Location: 91710, Chino
Submitted At: 1:21am 01-21-22
I find it hard to believe, that such well educated people, can still think restricting or taxing law abiding gun owners can stop criminals from being criminals. Y ou need to spend more time and effort making the criminal responsible for their crime. More severe sentences, and Prosecutors more concerned with prosecuting the criminal than win count. Think about upon conviction the seizure of their personal property to help pay for the trial. This would also help serve as a deterrent to the crime.
Ronald Ramos
Location: 95051, Santa Clara
Submitted At: 1:07am 01-21-22
The United States Constitution and the 2nd Amendment clearly state that the right to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed. Y et that is what you are attempting to do, knowing that it is unconstitutional.
Why don't you spend your time and the city's money on the many problems the city has including refusing to prosecute the rioters who assaulted people leaving the Trump rally in 2015? That would send a message to everyone that San Jose's leaders believe in enforcing the law.
Dan Guido
Location:
Submitted At: 12:35am 01-21-22
Y ou must include motor vehicles in your plan. After all, they are used in drive-by shootings. (Tongue firmly in cheek.)
LInda Bowin
Location: 39507, Gulfport
Submitted At: 10:54pm 01-20-22
This attempts to make the law-abiding citizens obtain insurance and also pay a fee to support public programs if they wish to keep firearms. Not all gun owners will do these things,Those who do not wish to disclose they have obtained a gun (criminals) will most certainly not want to be tracked. This measure specifically calls for taking away the firearms of those who do not comply, and the only ones in danger of this provision will be those who were in the system from compliance at some point.
Deann Frazier
Location: 84010, Bountiful
Submitted At: 10:43pm 01-20-22
What possible basis could there be for strapping a tax on a person's gun, other than retribution for purchasing it? Very bad form.
Todd Bradford
Location: 95132, SAN JOSE
Submitted At: 10:09pm 01-20-22
I am writing you to oppose this ordinance. I do not see any provisions to reduce the supposed "gun violence" that San Jose is experiencing. We are one of the only large cities that did not see a huge increase in violent activity.
The data in the ordinance is using numbers from other areas not San Jose. This does not show that San Jose is experiencing a "dramatic rise".
Susan Sikes
Location: 95127, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:53pm 01-20-22
I strongly object to this illegal attempt to penalize law-abiding citizens, and then have my taxes pay to fight the lawsuits that are sure to follow. Please stop this costly nonsense! Surely there are better uses for tax funds than to fight lawsuits which you would surely lose!
Otis Cole
Location: 24121, Moneta
Submitted At: 9:22pm 01-20-22
I do not believe it is American to “Tax” a person’s “God given RIGHT”!!! Remember who you are supposed to be working for. We the people remember and we vote!! john westbrook
Location: 93268, taft
Submitted At: 8:55pm 01-20-22
please vote no on the gun harm reduction ordanance,and start funding your police depatment. That will reduce violent srime,locking up violent criminals,not taxing honest citizens! Michael Horton
Location: 85035, Phoenix
Submitted At: 8:14pm 01-20-22
This is obviously unconstitutional and ANYONE attempting to pass such legislation needs to be immediately REMOVED from all political and legal positions FOR LIFE!!! Gary Chenoweth
Location: 81005, Pueblo
Submitted At: 7:52pm 01-20-22
Y ou all mite as well let Russia annex you and get it over with David Tong
Location: 94536, Fremont
Submitted At: 7:50pm 01-20-22
Go after the people committing the crimes instead of the law-abiding gun owner. That would go a long way to reduce gun harm in San Jose.
Luther Brown
Location: 37363, Ooltewah
Submitted At: 7:48pm 01-20-22
Back door registration as a future
move to confiscation.
A Constitutional right was never intended
to be taxed.
Dennis Phillips
Location: 81523, Glade Park
Submitted At: 7:46pm 01-20-22
Stupid laws and taxes only hurt the poor and the honest citizens! Follow our forefathers, they weren't stupid when they wrote the constitution of the United States of America!
MIKE HENDRICKS
Location: 46809-9743, FORT WAYNE
Submitted At: 7:07pm 01-20-22
The handgun tax is totally useless means of grabbing money, and grabbing guns. No matter how many guns you tax, the criminal will have as many as he, or she pleases. They are not worries about any tax. That is why they are called criminals.
Alan Smallwood
Location:
Submitted At: 6:54pm 01-20-22
To the elected officials of the cIty of San Jose, I stand with YOUR law abiding, gun owning residents and oppose your proposed ordinance. Y ou took an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States. Do your job!! Kenneth Freeman
Location: 85338, Goodyear
Submitted At: 6:41pm 01-20-22
This is most ridiculous. Lawful citizens will be the only ones who will comply. Criminals and thugs will continue to illegally posses firearms with little regard to the law. Dumb idea.
Scott Mackey
Location: 95130, San Jose
Submitted At: 6:39pm 01-20-22
I appose the "Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance" as it is far reaching into the private lives of citizens and contrary to democratic principals.
Thomas Sparks
Location: 94159, San Francisco
Submitted At: 6:37pm 01-20-22
This proposal is highly misguided and Illegal.
San Francisco has tried to do stuff like this a few times and has been shutdown in court every time which wastes millions of city taxpayer dollars. The NRA uses this to fundraise, and it works, because this action is illegal.
This also targets the poor and POC so ultimately this is going to hurt residents.
Erik Berls
Location: 95118, San Jose
Submitted At: 6:32pm 01-20-22
This proposal is highly misguided, and exposes San Jose to liability and extensive costs when it loses in court.
This will disproportionately negatively affect San Jose's poorer residents, and will not have the positive impact the Council believes that it will.
Eldon Buell
Location: 82801, Sheridan
Submitted At: 6:22pm 01-20-22
This is against our constitution and it is the first step to getting our Guns away from us.
JIM GOEHRING
Location: 95129 , San Jose
Submitted At: 6:15pm 01-20-22
2nd Amendment - and right to bear arms is in the Constitution. Neighborhoods are CURRENTL Y not safe.
Where is San Jose Police ? How many legally owned guns have been used in crimes ? Where is the data ? Ron Mayberry
Location:
Submitted At: 5:33pm 01-20-22
Stop trampling on the 2nd Amendment
If you want to live in a socialist society move the another country.
Vijaya Tensei
Location: 89134, Las Vegas
Submitted At: 5:33pm 01-20-22
The 2nd Amendment enshrines into written law the human right to self-defense, etc. through the use of available implements, e.g. firearms. If you really cared about curbing crime, you would realize that firearms are used in self- defense between 50,000 and 2 million times per year in this country! Are there criminals who mis-use them? Of course, but that is a CRIME problem, not a gun problem. Taxing responsible citizens for their exercise of a natural right is inherently wrong and mis-guided.
Ronald Dennison
Location: 95127-2711, San Jose
Submitted At: 5:19pm 01-20-22
I fail to see how this will improve the crime rate in San Jose or reduce the harm from gun violence. It affects only citizens who are law abiding, not criminals. Taxing law abiding citizens for criminal acts is ridiculous.
Stu b
Location:
Submitted At: 5:19pm 01-20-22
DO NOT IMPLEMENT THIS ORDINANCE, IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL! Joseph Hoelbrandt
Location: 95020, Gilroy
Submitted At: 5:13pm 01-20-22
California's continued attempt to take power away from law abiding citizens, and punish the lower income families. This is also racially discriminating-indirect racism which CA is great at.
Stephen Talbott
Location: 70471, Mandeville
Submitted At: 5:10pm 01-20-22
Typical Democrat move. Cover up your failings by stripping the Constitutional rights of not just gun owners but everyone of your constituents and every citizen of this Cesar country. We aren’t stupid out here. I hope the city budget is healthy cause you are about to be slapped with several lengthy expensive law suits. Wake up and start doing what is right, punish crime, discourage baby daddy’s, encourage the Nuclear family. Those few things will change everything. Idiots.
Steve Gustafson
Location: 95403, Santa Rosa
Submitted At: 5:08pm 01-20-22
Why is the City of San Jose going after law abiding citizens instead of fully prosecuting the people committing the crimes? If you wish to slow violence go after the alcohol stores and those who kill with their cars.
Kurt Beck
Location: 95662-5728, Orangevale
Submitted At: 5:08pm 01-20-22
Y et another attempt to punish law abiding citizens when the criminals need to be punished.
Jacquelyn Mason
Location: 92027, Escondido
Submitted At: 4:56pm 01-20-22
A tax on something that could save your life!!Ridiculous!! Barry Bauer
Location: 93710, Fresno
Submitted At: 4:49pm 01-20-22
Tax payers already pay into the General Fund for law enforcement and crime prevention. The City should use those funds enforce laws including catch, prosecute and incarcerate criminals. Extra taxes on registered gun owners that have committed no crime is intolerable. Catch the criminals and leave non-criminal tax payers alone.
This proposed ordinance is ridiculous.
Mary Eastes
Location: 46203, Indianapolis
Submitted At: 4:48pm 01-20-22
Do Not pass this ordinance.
DrD Worden
Location: 95045, San Juan Bautista
Submitted At: 4:37pm 01-20-22
Let the Second Amendment to the Constitution for the USA rule this subject.
Randy Smith
Location: 47303, Muncie
Submitted At: 4:32pm 01-20-22
Not right for the American public.
Chris Laasch
Location: 92863, Orange
Submitted At: 4:29pm 01-20-22
When politicians use the term common-sense measures, it is clear that they have an anti-gun agenda, not a real plan to solve OUR crime problem. In California, we have criminals committing heinous crimes and going free. It is proposition 47 and district attorney like Boudin that are the root of the problem. The Broken Windows theory, stopping criminals for petty crime keeps them from committing capitol crimes like murder. Consider Shawn Smith, killer of Brianna Kupfer as the latest example.
Jeff Williams
Location: 95982, SUTTER
Submitted At: 4:28pm 01-20-22
Any attack on the 2nd Amendment is unconditional but you all know that. Why don't you spend your time trying to take the gun's from the bad guys. Oh yeah that's to hard. Remember if you outlaw gun's only outlaws will have gun's. Leave the 2nd Amendment alone it's our last line of defense!
MIKE RANDALL
Location: 92110, San Diego
Submitted At: 4:26pm 01-20-22
City of San Jose City Council I as a member of this once great state am appalled that you people would even consider singling out gun owners and trying to tax them for something that THEY have not done nor have any control over YOU have the control by going after the Criminals who are committing these crimes that your city is experiencing The Courts are at fault for being so laxed on criminals committing these crimes. Y ou slap them on the hand and send them back out and 500 words is not enough Matt Burke
Location: 95130, San Jose
Submitted At: 4:13pm 01-20-22
As a long-time San Jose resident, I respectfully urge you to oppose the Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance. This legislation targets law-abiding gun owners who are not who is predominantly driving gun crime in San Jose. The focus should be on increased law enforcement to target those who are driving the problem rather than placing further costs on the law abiding citizens for simply exercising their constitutional rights.
Joseph Russo
Location: 94566, Pleasanton
Submitted At: 4:10pm 01-20-22
Taxes on Firearms and Ammunition should be against the law per second amendment - the right to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed!
Kenneth Usher
Location: 91792, West Covina
Submitted At: 4:00pm 01-20-22
On every news channel we hear of divisive political ideas. Y ou proposed ordinance is one of the worst. Like so many government agencies, you ignore crimes committed by the lawless. Instead you would punish law abiding citizens who happen to own firearms. Try to remember that the State has preempted you in the area of firearms laws. Work with your local citizens to improve our lives.
Alfred Knack
Location: 72626, Cotter
Submitted At: 3:56pm 01-20-22
More STIPID crap!!!!!
Jeff Chan
Location: 94024, Los Altos
Submitted At: 3:54pm 01-20-22
The proposed ordinance does nothing to actually stop violence or crime. It punishes only the law abiding. Gang members and violent criminals will continue to completely ignore "gun control" laws like these, therefore "gun control" is not crime control.
In addition, the proposed ordinance is an unconstitutional infringement of our Second Amendment rights and is therefore illegal under the highest law in the land.
Everyone who swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution should OPPOSE.
Darrell Floyd
Location:
Submitted At: 3:52pm 01-20-22
I fail to see how imposing a fine on lawful gun owners is going to reduce crime.
Steven Falconer
Location:
Submitted At: 3:50pm 01-20-22
Take away rights of lawful gun owners instead of focusing on the problem of criminal activity. lloyd newland
Location: 80127, littleton
Submitted At: 3:49pm 01-20-22
Wedonot need a tax that will result in registering all of our guns Gregory Gomez
Location: 98671, Washougal
Submitted At: 3:48pm 01-20-22
Imposing a gun tax on a Constitutional right is unconstitutional.
Daniel Earl
Location: 95361, Oakdale
Submitted At: 3:41pm 01-20-22
Ridiculous logic. The lawful citizens are selected as a group to be punished for being lawful .
Y et you don't even put the criminals behind bars. A hole logic Steven Yonan
Location: 49735, Gaylord
Submitted At: 3:27pm 01-20-22
If you're a Liberal you need to be taxed. Y ou are an enemy of the State, the people and the Constitution.
Randy Gates
Location: 36301, Dothan
Submitted At: 3:17pm 01-20-22
Are you going to tax the criminals guns also?
Mark Anderson
Location: 92057, Oceanside
Submitted At: 3:09pm 01-20-22
Liberalism is a disease. It affects the brain and heart. What else is there to be said? Mark Daugherty
Location: 94618, Oakland
Submitted At: 3:03pm 01-20-22
This ordinance "to reduce gun harm by requiring gun owners to obtain and maintain liability insurance and to provide for a fee". Enforcement includes fines, so that violent criminals without insurance will be charged a fine when they are arrested (?). What a worthless ordinance.
George Schaeffer
Location: 34715, Clermont
Submitted At: 2:59pm 01-20-22
Count the number of gun owners in your State. It is larger than any standing army in the world. Don't pass a law you can`t enforce.
James Lilja
Location: 95030, Los Gatos
Submitted At: 2:51pm 01-20-22
I fail to see how taxing gun owners who are not criminals reduces violence This sounds like political kabuki/grandstanding to help re-election and doesn’t solve the problem Tax me directly for more direct police funding and I’m in. Alternatively, legalize drugs and the gangs/cartels won’t have less reason to use guns
RANDY MACEY
Location: 34482, OCALA
Submitted At: 2:48pm 01-20-22
gun ownership is protected under the US Constitution
a sales tax was paid at purchase
a gun is like any other tool, the internet or even legislation, it can be used for good or bad punish the bad users, not law abiding citizens
Brandon Clarke
Location: 95125, San Jose
Submitted At: 2:30pm 01-20-22
The "logic" in this proposed ordinance behind charging all gun owners for the actions of some should be extended to the police and city council. Each of the 1700 employees of the SJPD should be responsible for the $26 million in civil rights lawsuit payouts since 2010, so $1275/person/year. And as this ordinance will likely be found unconstitutional, each member of the city council should be responsible for all legal fees in defending this ridiculous ordinance.
Fred Schmitt
Location: 14580, Webster
Submitted At: 2:29pm 01-20-22
We should strengthen the ATF and allow them record, maintain and track existing fire arms., rather than harassing legal law abiding citizens. Use the laws and regulations already in place. This is just another piece of unnecessary legislation designed to circumvent our 2nd amendment rights Sol Silverstein
Location: 95123, San Jose
Submitted At: 2:21pm 01-20-22
Do NOT pass this gun tax. It is an unfair and destructive burden on those with limited funds and retirees on fixed budgets. It is also a transparent backdoor attack on a person's right to personal defense, and rights of ownership.
It is also a punitive tax on those who have done nothing wrong or unlawful.
Douglas Richard
Location: 62234, Collinsville
Submitted At: 2:21pm 01-20-22
A tax meant to chill a Constitutional right is clearly unconstitutional. What you are trying to do is in the title of the bill, supposedly reduce "gun harm" by making it more expensive to own guns. Y ou could save yourself a lot of money by thinking before acting and not passing a bill that should get struck down in the Courts.
Matthew Dillon
Location:
Submitted At: 2:14pm 01-20-22
How about arresting criminals instead of imposing an UNCONSTITUTIONAL tax on law-abiding gun owners? It is this kind of legislation that is driving the good people out of San Jose and the rest of California. /s/ Former San Jose Resident
Paul Christensen
Location: 54904, Oshkosh
Submitted At: 2:10pm 01-20-22
I do not understand how this will lead to a reduction in gun harm? It sure seems like there is another motive behind this. Do you tax vehicles because they certainly do a lot of harm and injury. How about school sports, playgrounds, and vicious dogs? This is obviously a backdoor means to learn where all firearms are located so you can confiscate them at a later date. That would only get the legally owned ones, not the ones that the criminals have because they would not tell you!
Ed Meise
Location: 29486, Summerville
Submitted At: 2:08pm 01-20-22
Stop with your illegal, unconstitutional, and flat wrong schemes and games! Paul Piorkowski
Location: 06484, Shelton
Submitted At: 2:04pm 01-20-22
Instead of constantly punishing law abiding gun owners, why not enforce the laws already on the BOOKS that CRIMINALS continue to IGNORE because they're not ENFORCED?????? Jeffrey Carns
Location: 15650, Latrobe
Submitted At: 2:03pm 01-20-22
Do not let the depraved minds of the LEFT take control. Reject this nonsense like a pesky fly, swat and squash.
Scott Murray
Location: 86326, Cottonwood
Submitted At: 2:02pm 01-20-22
Have you heard the term “Taxation without representation”? We will not comply with your back door methods for attempting to impose gun control. The constitution clearly states that “We the People “ have been granted the Right to keep and bare arms, by our Creator. Not government.
Gary Carpenter
Location: 78611-3062, Burnet
Submitted At: 2:01pm 01-20-22
Please explain to me how this abusive tax on law abiding citizens of your area will reduce crime! Mark Pienciak
Location: 08610, Hamilton
Submitted At: 1:56pm 01-20-22
Vote no on this bill and let the honest citizens of this state have their constitional right to keep and bare arms without any threat of taxation
Guy M
Location: 95403
Submitted At: 1:55pm 01-20-22
Oppose this unconstitutional tax on law abiding gun owners, and enforce the current laws on the books.
Stop the revolving door on our jails and put these crooks away, use a gun, go to jail.
This tax will do nothing to stop the violent criminal, real prosecutors can do that, stop setting them free.
Marshall Robinson
Location: 06410-1924, CHESHIRE
Submitted At: 1:51pm 01-20-22
Do not pass this gun grabbing legislation. Punish criminals instead.
Christopher Johnson
Location: 92111, San Diego
Submitted At: 1:30pm 01-20-22
Please vote NO on firearm owners gun tax. The ordinance if approved would harm lawful gun owners while doing nothing to reduce crime or gun violence. The City needs to incarcerate criminals who commit crimes with guns, but the proposal seek to impose a tax on innocent lawful gun owners who are doing no harm.
Edward Vines
Location: 95020, Gilroy
Submitted At: 1:30pm 01-20-22
Why do foolish politicians always seem to punish law abiding citizens in for Gun crimes they did not commit? This type of ordinance never has and never will stop criminals from committing violent crimes.
Walter Wood
Location: 94703, Berkeley
Submitted At: 1:18pm 01-20-22
The ordinance if approved would harm lawful gun owners while doing nothing to reduce crime or gun violence.
The City needs to incarcerate criminals who commit crimes with guns, but the proposal seek to impose a tax on innocent lawful gun owners who are doing no harm.. The City Council should not be permitted to selectively tax residents for exercising their constitutional rights.
Jamahl Gow
Location: 95823, SACRAMENTO
Submitted At: 1:13pm 01-20-22
Vote NO on this Ordinance! Taxing law abiding citizens on their right to defend themselves against individuals who seek to harm others and break the law is not only unconstitutional, but immoral.
Richard Rice
Location:
Submitted At: 1:03pm 01-20-22
Please vote NO on firearm owners gun tax. This tax solves nothing but is intended to punish responsible legal gun owners. Public safety is your responsibility and that is not accomplished with a tax.
Daniel Murillo
Location:
Submitted At: 12:59pm 01-20-22
Criminals don’t have to pay a gun tax why should law abiding citizens be taxed for something criminals have for free!! Makes no sense and does not help with crime at all.
Laura Tousseau
Location: 89117, Las vegas
Submitted At: 12:56pm 01-20-22
How in the world will taxing gun ownership address the mental illness that is often associated with folks out there wanting to do harm to others?
Start prosecuting the criminals that use guns to commit crimes!!!! Y ou have an obligation to protect the freedoms of law abiding citizens.
This proposed ordinance clearly misses the Mark.
James Helms
Location: 95341-8049, Merced
Submitted At: 12:56pm 01-20-22
We don't need any gun taxes.
Dave Gifford
Location: 95835, SACRAMENTO
Submitted At: 12:48pm 01-20-22
Quit blaming law abiding citizens who rightfully own firearms for gun crimes. Punish the criminals who commit these crimes. Put them in prison and closely supervise their releases. So simple. It just takes courage and strong will. Blaming the tool they use to commit crime is the same as saying spoons are responsible for obesity.
Get real.
Priscilla Atwell
Location:
Submitted At: 12:46pm 01-20-22
How are you going to get the criminals to follow this ordinance? The homeless? Y ou are only punishing the law abiding. I may not live here but I do live in California and my town may be next for stupid ordinances like this.
Y our figures on deaths are apples and oranges--they sound bad but are you going to ban, or tax, knives, hands, cars, etc. for killing people? NO? Then don't pass this ordinance! Edwin Follin
Location: 91765, diamond bar
Submitted At: 12:45pm 01-20-22
This makes good people pay for something they have not cuased. Y our inability to see this or if you do tells me your not the people that should be in a position of making policy for others this will not serve the people in any meaningful way.i oppose this ordinance and so should you please find a better way to help the people and not your burden of cost please do the right thing
Kenneth Byerly
Location: 90065, Los Angeles
Submitted At: 12:33pm 01-20-22
As crime skyrockets and California's government is unwilling to protect public safety by keeping repeat offenders off the streets, citizens' right to protect themselves is more important than ever. Refusing to protect the public while trying to limit the public's right to protect itself is outrageous and harmful, if not outright malicious. At this point it seems as though the officials in charge of laws like this want innocent people to be hurt and killed.
Gary Kirkland
Location: 93422, Atascadero
Submitted At: 12:33pm 01-20-22
The 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is very clear. Elected officials in this country take an oath to defend the Constitution. This proposed law violates the Constitution, the oath elected officials take, and the spirit of freedom in this country.
Please vote "no" on this bill.
Thank you
Gary L. Kirkland
Lyndsey Sanchez
Location:
Submitted At: 12:32pm 01-20-22
If you want a safe city, don't support anti-gun legislation that is disguised as safety from guns. Chicago proves gun control laws don't work. Go after the people who harm and kill people with tools like guns, not the tools that law abiding people use to defend themselves and save lives. Murderers and other violent criminals aren't worried about abiding by your laws. They will use guns and other tools regardless of what laws you pass if you don't enforce current laws against violent criminals.
Ralph Rogers
Location: 92870-3906, PLACENTIA
Submitted At: 12:32pm 01-20-22
Oppose !!!
D L
Location:
Submitted At: 12:28pm 01-20-22
I strongly oppose this measure. It’s pure and simple corruption and theft Michael Thomas
Location: 45424, Dayton
Submitted At: 12:24pm 01-20-22
Shall not be infringed you commies.
Michael Archibald
Location: 95113, San Jose
Submitted At: 12:21pm 01-20-22
I don't know start holding the real criminals accountable and stop blaming lawful gun owners for your failure to control criminals.
James Abell
Location: 42301, Owensboro
Submitted At: 12:12pm 01-20-22
Do not pass this unconstitutional tax.
David Faller
Location: 93309, Bakersfield
Submitted At: 12:12pm 01-20-22
This is unconstitutional and not right.
James Wood
Location:
Submitted At: 12:11pm 01-20-22
The idea of implementing a firearm tax is wrong in multiple ways. Not only does it go against the 2nd amendment, but it also creates a back door registry of gun owners. There is not a tax for freedom of speech so why should there be a tax to own a firearm to protect myself and my family? The idea is just ridiculous.
Will O'Hara
Location: 92878, Corona
Submitted At: 12:11pm 01-20-22
The most ridiculous thing I heard in my entire life. Keep punishing the good people and not punish the responsible. Keep going, this will eventually turn on you.
Kenneth Hasekamp
Location: 95363, PATTERSON
Submitted At: 12:05pm 01-20-22
Please OPPOSE this ill-thought out ordinance, Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance. It will hurt honest, law abiding citizens while doing nothing to cut gun violence. It will also be tied up in court for years, wasting tax payer funds.
Please go after criminals who use guns with tougher penalties rather than law-abiding gun owners. Thank you for your service to San Jose.
JACK Kollmet
Location: 55001, Afton
Submitted At: 12:00pm 01-20-22
This is an unconstitutional act and will not stand court review. charles sherwin
Location: 27312, Pittsboro
Submitted At: 11:53am 01-20-22
"A (State) cannot impose a Tax, license, or fee on a Constitutionally protected Right," Murdoch vs. Penn 319 US 105 (1942); Further HELD "The licensing of ANY Constitutional Right, or ANY Registration of a Constitutional Right is UNCONSTITUTIONAL (emphasis added)" see 321 US 573 (1974), plus the "full incorporation" of the 2d and 14th Amendments, McDonald vs. Chicago (2010).
K Oloughlin
Location:
Submitted At: 11:51am 01-20-22
Do not tax my right to legally and responsibly own a firearm. craig miller
Location:
Submitted At: 11:51am 01-20-22
I 0ppose any gun laws to be passed. There are a lot of gun laws on the books but there has not been enough laws applied to the criminals that break these laws being charged for unlawful uses.
Amy Hettrick
Location: 16748, Shinglehouse
Submitted At: 11:51am 01-20-22
Completely unconstitutional. Gun rights are not only for those who can afford to pay a tax, they are for EVERYONE. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. This will do nothing to stop crime, since criminals do not take the legal routes to obtain their weapons. This will just further boost crime when good people can't afford to obtain firearms for self defense, emboldening criminals to attack the defenseless. VOTE NO.
Edward Faatz
Location: 13088, Liverpool
Submitted At: 11:51am 01-20-22
Stop circumventing an illegal guns registry.
Dante Alipio
Location:
Submitted At: 11:45am 01-20-22
Re: "gun liability insurance", no such insurance exits. Where will lawful gun owners supposed to get that? Also, the evidence cited in the ordinance reference suicides and unintentional shootings. There are already state laws that address these concerns; getting liability insurance will not reduce those issues any more than getting car insurance reduces drunk driving or traffic accidents.
John Bianchi
Location: 95961-8721, Plumas Lake
Submitted At: 11:45am 01-20-22
Do not put a tax on us just for owning a firearm.
Nelson Brown
Location: 47562, Odon
Submitted At: 11:44am 01-20-22
A gun tax will only burden the population of legal gun owners. The gun problem is created by the growing criminal activity. Criminals won't be inconvenienced since they don't follow laws anyway. The solution to the gun problem is better enforcement of laws and actually burdening criminals. Enforce penalties, collect fines, get criminals off the streets and make crime not pay.
Uladzislau Sharanhovich
Location:
Submitted At: 11:44am 01-20-22
VOTE NO! Did you even study this before putting up for vote or just as usual pulled out of a thin air based on wrong assumptions, irrational fear and will to tax everything and everyone? How many crimes do lawful firearm owners in San Jose commit per year? Let me guess, it's probably zero. When we buy a firearm in CA we already pay lots of taxes and fees - gun owner certificate, FFL transfer fee, safe, safety lock, etc. Gun owners are already taxed in CA more then in any other state. VOTE NO!
Brian Gaines
Location: 94577, San Leandro
Submitted At: 11:38am 01-20-22
Esteemed City Council,
I believe the study was a waste of taxpayer money.
-Outside of suicide, acts of gun violence are most often committed with illegally possessed firearms. -Many of the guns legally possessed and responsibly stored by private citizens in San José and SCC are not handguns.
-Handguns, not rifles or shotguns, are used in the overwhelming majority of gun violence incidents.
This ordinance will only expose and penalize the folks that represent a major DETERRENT to gun violence.
Jim Bracken
Location: 74074, Stillwater
Submitted At: 11:35am 01-20-22
This is most likely illegal and unconstitutional
R Schautz
Location: 49302, ALTO
Submitted At: 11:35am 01-20-22
Do not tax an individuals right to defend themselves. This proposed "tax" will also unfairly affect lower income families. Vote NO on the proposal!
Citizen Kane
Location: 95126, San Jose
Submitted At: 11:35am 01-20-22
Go ahead and tax your lawful gun owners & see how fast we move away. Attacking lawful citizens will have no effect on reducing violent crime, & those criminals who do not care about your laws. If you want to have a real impact on violent crime, try supporting your police, and then put those criminals off the streets you invited into our county when you defunded our police! Remember, an armed society is a polite society with little if any crime! John Gottfredson
Location:
Submitted At: 11:34am 01-20-22
This flies in the face of Civil Rights period. The government has been pumping Civil Rights at nauseum but only selectively. If you truly believe in Civil Rights and the Constitution then you know this is bad for Freedom and Civil Rights.
I oppose this.
Jeff Lowery
Location: 47362, New Castle
Submitted At: 11:28am 01-20-22
I oppose a tax on firearms. There is no tax on the First Amendment and there should be no tax on the right to bear arms guaranteed under the Second Amendment. It is also a backdoor gun registration scheme.
Danny Turney
Location: 35083, Holly pond
Submitted At: 11:25am 01-20-22
Stop the taxes! Charge me for my God given rite? No!
Andrew Kim
Location: 92562, Murrieta
Submitted At: 11:25am 01-20-22
I strongly oppose to this immoral and unconstitutional law being proposed. America, once a great nation, is starting to become what it escaped from, a tyrant nation trying to control it’s citizens by taking away their rights and taxing them to utter poverty.
carroll creswell
Location: 07920, Basking Ridge
Submitted At: 11:25am 01-20-22
This tax is an attempt to deny citizens rights guaranteed to them by the constitution's Bill of Rights! In addition it is prejudiced against people whose incomes might not allow them to afford such costs. Such an attempt by one extremist faction to disallow others from a guaranteed right is not consistent with a free republic and smacks of authoritarian dictatorship! Such restrictions on a guaranteed liberty should not be allowed in a free society.
Tim Perkins
Location: 95687, Vacaville
Submitted At: 11:24am 01-20-22
Please vote no on this ordinance
Dan Batchelor
Location: 97206, Portland
Submitted At: 11:20am 01-20-22
Do not impead our rights given by our forefathers in the constitution of the United States. These rights were given to us for a reason and the reason is quite clear
Dennis Lydston
Location: 98121, SEATTLE
Submitted At: 11:19am 01-20-22
As a responsible gun owner I oppose this new tax on gun owners. This is ridiclous that any state would stoop so low as to level a tax on gun owners. This conflicts with the 2nd amendment of our constitutional right to bear arms! Who in their right mind would ever consider such a tax ??? I can't believe that law abiding gun owners will stand for this.
Alex Tary
Location: 96002, Redding
Submitted At: 11:14am 01-20-22
How can you even think of taxing a right guaranteed by the Constitution. It is quite illegal and a certain ticket to court.
Leonard Stacey
Location:
Submitted At: 11:13am 01-20-22
How is taxing Law Abiding gun owners going to stop gun violence in your community? It's Not and you know that! So why don't you pass something going after the Illegal gun toting criminals? And stop Infringing on the rights of Law Abiding Citizens.
John Liddle
Location: 92117, San Diego
Submitted At: 11:10am 01-20-22
This ordinance is ridiculous. Those wanting to protect themself you want to pay a tax for those that won't! Enforce current laws, provide more police to do it and increase penalties for violators. Clearly it's not just the gun owner who is responsible for everyone in the city.
Steve Hat
Location:
Submitted At: 11:10am 01-20-22
Leave it Alone!
Gloria Aman
Location: 28574, Richlands
Submitted At: 11:07am 01-20-22
This is a back door to gun registration. Oppose the gun tax ! Focus on the criminals and not the law abiding gun owners. This is unconstitutional! The second amendment prohibits all governments from enacting laws regarding firearms. If this bill is approved, you will be sued and you will lose at the cost of many taxpayer dollar making you un-electable. Y ou want to tax America's who are gun owners while letting in illegal's.
Carolyn Bentley
Location: 55369, Maple Grove
Submitted At: 11:05am 01-20-22
Do not pass this proposed ordinance. Legal gun owners don't need to be punished for illegal gun users & their behavior. The government's function is to reward, protect & support those who are following the laws by getting a legal permit & conversely to punish, fine & prosecute those who are illegally acquiring firearms & using them for destructive purposes. Please do your job & don't pass the buck to law abiding citizens who choose to own guns for sport or their own protection.
Kevin Beers
Location: 95624, Elk Grove
Submitted At: 11:03am 01-20-22
This is a ridiculous ordinance and a waste of tax payer money. It is completely illegal and if passed will be overturned in court. If you want to state your opinion take out an ad in the newspaper. Anyone voting for this mess should be recalled.
Patricia West
Location: 30662, Royston
Submitted At: 10:56am 01-20-22
Taxing American gun owners, while letting illegal aliens cross into out country with weapons (unchecked), tells us all that you could care less about your fellow Americans or even the country and fancy jobs that allow you to abuse your power. Keep it up, everyone needs to load at the new Virginia Hov. And DA. Now there is the future of our beloved America.
A growing kick back to officials like here in California. Get American focused or get out of office....
Gordon Phillips
Location: 89121, L as Vegas
Submitted At: 10:55am 01-20-22
NO tax!!!!!!!!!
George Edwards
Location:
Submitted At: 10:54am 01-20-22
I am 82 years old, have owned firearms most of my life and have used them totally for recreation. It is a hobby and a sport. I have never been involved in any illegal activity or used firearms in an illegal manner. I enjoy collecting and competing in all types of competitive shooting sports and don't understand why I should be penalized for the activities of criminals and crazies. Lets put the criminals behind bars not the legal citizens.
Kevin Martin
Location: 92586, Menifee
Submitted At: 10:54am 01-20-22
Once again you think taking away guns from law abiding citizens will reduce crime. Y ou just don’t get do you. We are trying to protect our families. We are not the ones committing these crimes. If me and my wife are sitting in a restaurant and a active shooter comes in my first responsibility is to my wife. If you and your wife are in the same restaurant I will also do the best I can to protect you and your wife also. I am licensed and trained and you still don’t trust me with a gun.
Roger Wells
Location: 84737, HURRICANE
Submitted At: 10:53am 01-20-22
Please do not vote to tax people for the ownership of their guns. We need our guns to protect our families from the violence in our country.
Todd Jeanpierre
Location: 91506-2536, Burbank
Submitted At: 10:52am 01-20-22
Good morning City Council, I strongly object to this highly immoral and unconstitutional law being proposed.
It's long overdue to heavily prosecute CRIMINALS. Not honest, law abiding tax payers. Thank you for your time.
Todd Jeanpierre
Scott Hoffman
Location: 21740, Hagerstown
Submitted At: 10:49am 01-20-22
How can you tax the right to own a firearm or firearms? What's next a tax on each word you speak. This is unconstitutional !. We fought a war over taxes at the birth of this country. If only we could bring back our forefathers to see how despicable and unworthy the people are that are supposed to be representing the tax payers. I thought when you were sworn in you took an oath to uphold the constitution. glenda McElwee
Location: 32025, Lake City
Submitted At: 10:47am 01-20-22
I am a traveling nurse working many hospitals in Calif. including San Jose. This bill is illegal under the constitution. No illegal registry of individuals guns. Crime has risen so much in the state. Spend your money fighting the criminals instead of the legitimate people trying to protect themselves and working to pay your taxes.
We will remember this at election time.
Mike Dumm
Location: 77880, Washington
Submitted At: 10:45am 01-20-22
This is a back door to gun registration. Oppose the gun tax ! Mark Schnittker
Location: 95110, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:44am 01-20-22
Not well thought out. What insurance is available and what is the cost. Is that cost fair such that there is not undue cost. High costs would make gun ownership only for the rich and possibly socially and ethnically discriminate. Moreover it is only speculative that the suicide prevention effort would have any beneficial effect.
This does not seem like a genuine concern for those that may be subject to gun injuries, but more of an anti firearm effort.
MICHAEL PARKER
Location: 90292, Marina del Rey
Submitted At: 10:44am 01-20-22
Please focus on the criminals and not the law abiding gun owners.
Rick Buller
Location: 98375, Puyallup, WA
Submitted At: 10:43am 01-20-22
What does this have to do with being a good citizen?
Y ou were elected to work for us and protect our constitution.
If you would do your job and protect us from the criminals there wouldn’t be a all time buying records in the gun market.
Time to wake up and see the changes.
The changes are not on your side.
NO TO GUN OWNER TAX
James Hegedus
Location: 95357, Modesto
Submitted At: 10:41am 01-20-22
Mahatma Gandhi once said, “Among the many misdeeds of British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest.” As a fellow resident of California I am against yet another power grab and discriminatory action of the City Council to impose a tax on citizens for the constitutional right of owning a gun. “Gun free zones” have been the target of more than 98% of all mass shootings. People aren't safer by making it harder to own guns.
Russell Vanwinkle
Location: 85126, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:41am 01-20-22
I oppose this ordinance I’m for several reasons:
1. It is a clear infringement on the People’s Second Amendment right. No other enumerated right has ever been couched in terms that require a fee be paid to the Government. Imagine the same thing applies to the First Amendment where politicians must pay a fee to give a campaign speech.
2. It requires the People to purchase insurance against another person’s illegal act. I find very unlikely that this is going to be made avaiable by insurers.
Joe Black
Location: 95124, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:39am 01-20-22
This is another attempt to raise money to waste it on other worthless programs such as this climate change boondoggle--TOTALL Y OPPOSED!!
Mike McCosh
Location:
Submitted At: 10:37am 01-20-22
This proposed ordinance will do nothing to reduce crime. It will only harm the good citizens that are responsible and law abiding. I urge you to vote "No" to this proposal. Thank you.
CRPA MEMBER
Location:
Submitted At: 10:37am 01-20-22
This is an unconstitutional attack on gun owners, leading to a gross misuse of tax-payer dollars to fund the city's then already lost legal defense...
Howard Roberts
Location: 95135, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:34am 01-20-22
So like the 'woke' politicians to give a bill a name that is opposite to its effect, way to spin! This is an assault on freedom that will do nothing to improve life in San Jose, to the contrary it is a burden on law abiding citizens, especially those on fixed incomes. This bill should be defeated.
Martijn VanNooijen
Location: 95039, Hoorn
Submitted At: 10:29am 01-20-22
The Tax is unconstitutional. It demands a register of your firearm and that is wrong and unconstitutional MarkEric Roth
Location: 19053-4956, TREVOSE
Submitted At: 10:25am 01-20-22
Dear Council people,
The second amendment prohibits all governments from enacting laws regarding firearms. If this bill is approved, you will be sued and you will lose at the cost of many taxpayer dollar making you un-electable. I also find it regrettable that this is coming from the home of the Winchester House, a history I would relish if I were in your position.
Sincerely,
Mark Eric Roth
Mark Mondrogon
Location: 94585, Suisun City
Submitted At: 10:23am 01-20-22
None of this makes anyone safer... but you know this, and I know that's not what its about. Duplicitous scumbaggery is all this is.
Scott Orians
Location: 37664, Kingsport
Submitted At: 10:23am 01-20-22
No new gun taxes. PERIOD
Scott Wagenseller
Location: 91360, Thousand Oaks
Submitted At: 10:21am 01-20-22
Stop this madness against legal residents and their inalienable rights. Get the criminals doing bad things, don't go after citizens exercising their rights.
Don Ream
Location: 92028, Fallbrook
Submitted At: 10:21am 01-20-22
This ordinance is an unconstitutional use of tax payer's money. Guns are not the issue. Being soft on crime is the issue. When you weaken law enforcement, you strengthen crime. Please vote against this ordinance.
Dave Westrich
Location: 45013, Hamilton
Submitted At: 10:20am 01-20-22
Please do not pass this ordinance. It makes no sense. Will you be taxing criminal's guns or just law abiding citizens' guns. Thanks, Dave.
Delbert logsdon
Location: 42713, bonnieville
Submitted At: 10:20am 01-20-22
stop it now
Donald Pimentel
Location: 95932, Colusa
Submitted At: 10:19am 01-20-22
This country was based on the right to bear arms. Polititons are trying to change the Constitution to their liking, not the general publics. This needs to stop! Law abiding citizens need to be able to protect their families and their property!
Dave Morley
Location: 83221, Blackfoot
Submitted At: 10:16am 01-20-22
San Jose would have less crime if Sheriff Laurie Smith would grant CCW Licenses to good people. Bad guys know that honest people don’t break the law by being armed. I’m a CCW Instructor, licensed by the CA Department of Justice. Those granted a license are fingerprinted, checked out by FBI and DOJ, interviewed, trained in use of deadly force, and must demonstrate competence with their gun. After 60 years in CA, I just moved to Idaho…..they punish the bad people, not the good. I still carry daily attilio contini
Location: 12411, Bloomington
Submitted At: 10:16am 01-20-22
NO gun taxes, period!
Evelyn Montel
Location:
Submitted At: 10:15am 01-20-22
Do NOT pass this proposed bill. It goes against the Second Amendment. Please read the constitution!! This will ONL Y hinder law bidding citizens. Criminals will still have guns.
Phillip leber
Location: 95124, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:14am 01-20-22
I oppose
Daniel Cameron
Location:
Submitted At: 10:14am 01-20-22
I understand your city is planning to tax firearm owners for owning a firearm. Since owning a firearm is a right granted by God, and elected officials work for their constituents, I would have to believe this tax is unconstitutional and a violation of the oath every politician takes. Don’t penalize lawful citizens for something that is their God given right, that is just wrong.
Michael Cresto
Location: 93023, Ojai
Submitted At: 10:14am 01-20-22
How can taxing law-abiding gun owners resolve your city’s crime problems? Y ou will penalize lawful gun owners who are not the cause of your city’s problems and who are exercising a constitutional right to gun ownership. It is hard to imagine this ill-conceived approach will stand up to judicial review, so why are you pursuing it, taking city council time from more productive initiatives and ultimately spending the city’s money to defend this blatant anti- second amendment action?
Fern Feldman
Location: 50602, Allison
Submitted At: 10:12am 01-20-22
Another back door try to get more gun control. seems to me to be PROFILING!!!!!!!!!!!! illegal!!!!! Roberta Pimenteo
Location: 95932, Colusa
Submitted At: 10:10am 01-20-22
We MUST keep our rights to bear arms to protect our families. It is our constitutional right! Get rid of government officials who oppose that!
Chandler Carlson
Location: 55331, Excelsior
Submitted At: 10:10am 01-20-22
I support the 2nd Amendment!
Andre Bertauche
Location: 95448, Healdsburg
Submitted At: 10:09am 01-20-22
Stop interfering with the second amendment
Ben Rogers
Location: 38849, guntown
Submitted At: 10:07am 01-20-22
what are you thinking
Gary Grace
Location: 95252, Valley springs
Submitted At: 10:06am 01-20-22
Y ou have all lost your minds, how about you focus on criminals for a change, not the law abiding citizen Robert Mendez
Location: 92083
Submitted At: 10:03am 01-20-22
With all the horrible criminals that cities keep releasing into public life establishing their rein of power why would any civilized part of government make it harder for citizens to protect themselves from being harmed or worse yet murdered because of political motives of controlling ordinary law abiding Americans.
VICTOR MERLINO
Location: 95136, San Jose, Ca
Submitted At: 10:02am 01-20-22
The Gun harm reduction act is unfair to law abiding citizens that own firearms. It taxes them and places unfair insurance burden on them because of the acts of criminals. Don't create an adversarial position with law abiding citizens. If you truly want to solve the the problem of violence in the City of San Jose bring ALL parties to discuss a viable solution. Don't just talk with an anti-second amendment group. Vote NO on this act.
Mr Teufelhunden
Location:
Submitted At: 10:01am 01-20-22
Taxes have already been paid on firearms. This bovine feces falls under the ‘double taxation act’. Of course some fecal cephalics have dreamt this up because they don’t want FREE Americans to be able to protect themselves under the 2nd Amendment.
David Lokey
Location: 95037-7102, Morgan Hill
Submitted At: 10:01am 01-20-22
Not only is the Ordinance completely unconstitutional, it is directing energy needlessly IN THE WRONG DIRECTION. Taxing Good People, to pay for the things Bad People do is ridiculous and wrong. Prosecute the Bad People to the fullest extent of the law, and I will guarantee you that there will be a reduction in violent crime.
Bob Puzzles
Location: 95002, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:00am 01-20-22
Why? Why are you placing an unprecedented burden on law abiding tax payers of this city? Why do continue to ignore the real issues the city is facing like homelessness, drug addiction an unprecedented crime wave. The lack of the cities district attorney support of the rule of law and the police department. Why do you exhibit stomach racism against the good taxpaying residents of the decaying City? Why you continue to waste taxpayer dollars with such frivolous acts that will end in lawsuits?
Charles McLean
Location: 71264, Oak Ridge
Submitted At: 9:59am 01-20-22
that is so low to try to make someone pay for a weapon when the criminals get by for free Johnnie Smith
Location: 95682, Shingle Springs
Submitted At: 9:57am 01-20-22
San Jose Council
Adding a tax to law abiding gun owners is unconstitutional and against the 2nd amendment. Y our efforts should be directed at the criminals and keeping them off the streets. Violent crimes are increasing due to defunding police and letting criminals go without any penalties.
Tim Ricker
Location: 95608, Carmichael
Submitted At: 9:56am 01-20-22
Taxing a basic human right is unconstitutional. This bill is unconstitutional. When you took this job, you made an oath to support The Constitution. We need to be clear....there are two things violent criminals will not do: 1) They will not follow the law, and 2) They will not pay taxes or insurance to own a gun. This bill will cause law abiding gun owners to pay for the crimes of others. Do the right thing and say NO to this bill.
Ray Cardinale
Location: 20171, Herndon
Submitted At: 9:56am 01-20-22
the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Lillian Suchey
Location: 49707, Alpena
Submitted At: 9:55am 01-20-22
I already paid tax on my gun and do not need any more. We have the right to bear arms for hunting and protection according to the "bill of rights".
Ron Rynearson
Location: 95821, Sacramento
Submitted At: 9:53am 01-20-22
It's not the guns But the Criminals behind the guns and knives are just as deadly as we all found out last week in Los Angeles. All government agencies need to start focusing on make the time for these violations harder and more strict and no more judges just turn them loose.
Protect the 2A for the good of people.
Theodore Cahoon
Location: 80516, ERIE
Submitted At: 9:53am 01-20-22
If the city of San Jose wants to decrease crime with guns it should prosecute the offenders, not tax lawful citizens.
OPPPOSE the Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance.
Bobbie Thompson
Location: 92404, San Bernardino
Submitted At: 9:53am 01-20-22
I oppose this ordinance. It punishes lawbiding citizens not the lawbreakers .
Kim Koehler
Location: 91935, Jamul
Submitted At: 9:49am 01-20-22
Dear San Jose City Council Members. Y our proposed ordinance to tax law abiding citizens for exercising their constitutional right to own a firearm is unconstitutional and just plain unfair! Rather, if you indeed wish to reduce crime, focus your efforts on getting the criminals off the streets. Thank you for considering my input.
Tom McGinley
Location: 95008, Campbell
Submitted At: 9:47am 01-20-22
If you put thesame amount of effort into which criminals get released and which do not get released you wouldn't have this problem. Stop trying to deflect the issue.
Robert Meltzer
Location:
Submitted At: 9:47am 01-20-22
clear violation of 2nd amendment. oppose.
Mitch McConnel
Location: 95002, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:46am 01-20-22
I oppose the Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance
Marcus Holican
Location: 95124, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:44am 01-20-22
Just look at the train lootings in Los Angeles or general looting that we have been witnessing in cities all over US - criminals have weapons and don't hesitate to use them. What are you going to do when they come for you? Roll over and beg for mercy? A potential for a gun to be faced is a solid deterrent for thugs and criminals to have to consider before they prey on the defenseless.
James Meehan
Location:
Submitted At: 9:44am 01-20-22
I urge the City Council to oppose this unconstitutional ordinance (2A: "shall not be infringed"), and to instead support initiatives to ensure that law-abiding citizens are well-armed and trained to use them safely. Law-abiding citizens are not the ones who cause problems with legally-purchased guns. No matter what you try to do with gun restrictions, criminals will still get guns. Y ou can deter gun violence by supporting a strong police force, enforcing tough penalties & promoting gun safety.
David Lawson
Location: 91016-2301, MONROVIA
Submitted At: 9:44am 01-20-22
To whom it may concern:
Passing this gun tax will only harm law abiding citizens, there for I am against this. Do not tie the law abiding citizens hands to protect themselves. Please focus your attention on stopping criminals. Y ou are leaving them on the streets and taxing law abiding citizens for responsibly owning weapons to protect their families from the criminals you are ignoring. With due respect, you are misdirected! Mark V
Location: 95624, Elk Grove
Submitted At: 9:44am 01-20-22
Please stop the arbitrary taxing of specific groups that are not related to the problem you are facing. This does nothing to solve the problem of increasing violent crime. I oppose the proposed ordinance you're considering, since it will not have the result you are looking for and only penalizes a specific group that has nothing to do with the problem. Criminals understand there are no real penalties any longer and don't obey the laws anyway. Don't penalize the law-abiding!
Don Weatherbee
Location: 96003, Redding
Submitted At: 9:43am 01-20-22
Lawful gun owners are not the problem with society we are experiencing an uphill in crime guns owned by patriots will undoubtedly be instrumental in bringing what's wrong with society under control .
David Reynolds
Location: 92692, Mission Viejo
Submitted At: 9:43am 01-20-22
Please focus your attention on prosecution of criminals, and keeping them behind bars! Y ou are leaving them on the streets and taxing law abiding citizens for responsibly owning weapons to protect their families from the criminals you are ignoring. With due respect, you are misdirected! Keepour Freedoms
Location:
Submitted At: 9:43am 01-20-22
The City, like most urban areas in California, is grappling with an increase in violent crime. But rather than dealing with the criminals who commit those crimes, you are instead seeking to impose a tax on registered gun owners that the s will be challenged in the courts. Even worse, those ill-gotten taxes will fund a legal defense of your own city! Y es, you are taxing own residents to pay legal bills associated with taking away the rights of those very same residents.
Sherry Luke
Location: 95322, Gustine
Submitted At: 9:41am 01-20-22
To whom it may concern:
Passing this gun tax will only harm law abiding citizens, there for I am against this. Do not tie the law abiding citizens hands to protect themselves. The law has a hard time protecting us. We should be able to protect ourselves when they can not defend us.
Kevin Beyer
Location: 83060, Santa Paula
Submitted At: 9:40am 01-20-22
Please focus your attention on stopping criminals. Y ou are leaving them on the streets and taxing law abiding citizens for responsibly owning weapons to protect their families from the criminals you are ignoring. With due respect, you are misdirected!
Dale Pritchard
Location: 93230-9747, Hanford
Submitted At: 9:39am 01-20-22
Our 2nd amendment shall NOT be infringed!
It protects all citizens in defending themselves from the criminal element We citizens do not have tax paid armed guards like politicians do! So we have the right to train to protect ourselves
Thanks for listening
Daniel Kats
Location:
Submitted At: 9:39am 01-20-22
Making legal owners pay a tax for the crimes others commit does not solve the problem nor help the law abiding people. The focus should be on keeping criminals off the streets instead of catch and release.
ALAN BUTTERFIELD
Location: 94558, NAPA
Submitted At: 9:37am 01-20-22
very un american
Scott Davidson
Location: 93626, Friant
Submitted At: 9:36am 01-20-22
This is ineffective and misguided legislation that will neither fund it's purported cause nor survive it's first blush with jurisprudence. It is a waste of City resources and an insult to responsible gun owners who choose to actively protect their families instead of begging for lenience from violent criminals. Please demand of your City leaders that they do the hard work needed to keep violent criminals off the streets and send this legislation to the rubbish bin.
Jeffrey Muth
Location: 93023, Ojai
Submitted At: 9:35am 01-20-22
Hello,
I am writing you to let you know that I oppose the Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance that you are proposing.
It is an unconstitutional attack on lawful gun owners and does not affect criminals.
Thank Y ou,
Jeff Muth
Todd Wester
Location: 95138, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:35am 01-20-22
I work. I pay my taxes. I am a legal gun owner. I have never been arrested. I have never committed a crime with any of my guns. But now you want to punish me and levy more taxes on something that i have already paid taxes on simply because i am doing the right thing. Enough San Jose.. How about punishing the right people Jeff Colon
Location: 93924, Carmel Valley
Submitted At: 9:34am 01-20-22
As a retired deputy, I oppose this ordinance. I sincerely doubt that individuals willing to use guns in the course of crime would carry insurance. In my experience, responsible gun owners seek out training and exercise self- control the same way they respect other laws, ordinances, and rights. Criminal and financial penalties for the misuse of firearms should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. A blanket tax on citizens exercising a constitutional right is an abuse of the city's power.
Revonne Caruso
Location: 93308, Bakersfield
Submitted At: 9:34am 01-20-22
DON'T DO IT !!!
Phillip Fonseca
Location: 92886, Y orba Linda
Submitted At: 9:33am 01-20-22
Like most legislation of this nature, it only harms and infringes on the rights of law abiding citizens. Forcing those who already buy auto insurance, medical insurance, homeowners/renters insurance, life insurance and pay taxes up the wazoo to pay more for something that occurs at such a minute percentage is absurd. How about charging smokers to insure the lives of others their second hand smoke harms? Deal with real issues that really kill Americans at “pandemic” levels.
Steven Ramirez
Location: 91320, Newbury Park
Submitted At: 9:32am 01-20-22
Please stop the arbitrary taxing of specific groups that are not related to the problem you are facing. Y our misguided efforts make for easy TV sounds bites, but do nothing to solve the problem of increasing violent crime.
I oppose the proposed ordinance your are considering, since it will not have the effect you are looking for and only penalizes a specific group that has nothing to do with the problem. Criminals understand there are not real penalties any longer, and this is the result.
Gregory Lyczak
Location: 34601, BROOKSVILLE
Submitted At: 9:30am 01-20-22
Guns are a right and taxes are already imposed by sales. Stay out of our pockets and holsters! Lee Price
Location: 49301, ADA
Submitted At: 9:28am 01-20-22
A "gun tax" is un-American and should be illegal. If I were under your jurisdiction, I would refuse to register my firearms and would not pay your illegal "tax". All American citizens have a duty to resist illegal and immoral legislation.
Edward VanLaningham
Location: 92064, POWAY
Submitted At: 9:26am 01-20-22
Isn't there enough taxes in Ca? We are being taxed to death. No more taxes.
Robert Oliver
Location: 95120, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:25am 01-20-22
I urge you to oppose this ordinance. It aims to tax anyone who obeys the law to own a legal firearm which is our God given RIGHT protected by the constitution. This ordinance will serve no other purpose but to punish the law abiding by making an already over taxed state even more so. Not only will it do this but it will do absolutely nothing to stem the rising violent crime that comes from those who already do not follow the laws and ordinances of this city or state. Oppose this ordinance.
Richard Montanez
Location:
Submitted At: 9:24am 01-20-22
If the intent is to reduce criminal use of stolen firearms, increase the punishment for theft and go after criminals.
If the intent is to make firearms ownership as hard as possible for law-abiding citizens who keep firearms to protect themselves and their families, continue down this path.
This is another step towards a de facto ban on the right of the individual to own firearms.
Ted Bisceglia
Location: 92336, Fontana
Submitted At: 9:23am 01-20-22
Y ou cannot penalize individuals who are not responsible for the crime. By refusing to hold the criminally insane, or criminally motivated indiviuals accountable for their crimes against others, you are only guaranteeing that those same criminals will continue to wreak havoc on society unfettered by any kind of consequences. The fact that I or anyone else has to explain the concept of personal accountability and consequences of choice, to our elected officials is beyond infuriating. Why??
Scott Biedermann
Location:
Submitted At: 9:23am 01-20-22
I oppose this unconstitutional attack on legal gun owners. I am asking you to please vote no on this. Illegal gun owners are the problem and have never and will never follow any laws.
Thank you
Daniel Graham
Location: 93012, Camarillo
Submitted At: 9:22am 01-20-22
The increase in violent crime has 0 to do with law-abiding gun owners and 100% to do with failed public policy and single-party leadership in this state. Stop misusing taxes as a weapon to attack the very people suffering under these recent crime waves, making a bad problem even worse. Why do you want innocent law-abiding citizenry to be so interfered with regarding their 2nd amendment rights? That is a pro-crime position and inexcusable. I sincerely urge voting against this measure. Thank you.
James Grasso
Location: 90290, Topanga
Submitted At: 9:22am 01-20-22
Oppose. So the idea is to force/penalize law abiding citizens to pay for the suicidal actions of others. How about focusing your time on criminality instead of attacking others rights. Time to vote out anyone who supports this type of ordinance. What do you think this will cost to defend? Y ou know you are going to court immediately. How about fiduciary fiscal responsibility and stop waiting our money?
CHARLES WILMOT
Location: 92807, Anaheim
Submitted At: 9:21am 01-20-22
I oppose the Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance. I encourage you to push for prosecution of criminals, including those who use firearms in commission of their crimes.
Robert Schroeder
Location: 90605-2249, Whittier
Submitted At: 9:21am 01-20-22
Dear sirs: This proposal is misguided and ineffectual. It puts undue hardship on people who are Not the problem and does nothing to stop the problem created by a small percentage of criminals. It also places barriers to people exorcising their Civil Rights, something you would not think of doing for voting or speech. I urge you to strike this proposal down.
Thank you
Mark Johnson
Location: 92860, Norco
Submitted At: 9:20am 01-20-22
Y ou and I are all part of California. No matter what city we live in, taxing responsible legal gun owners for violent criminal activity is punishing them for something they are not responsible for or even connected with. With nearly 30 years of law enforcement experience behind me, I know that proactive policing and relentless prosecution of criminals are the answer. Fix the problem, not the symptom. If you need to tax someone, tax the convicted criminal just as many cities do for DUI's.
Paul Johns
Location: 95824, Sacramento
Submitted At: 9:20am 01-20-22
This ordinance has nothing to do with safety, it is just a gun grabbing attempt. It only makes it hard on law abiding citizens.
Michael Fish
Location: 92020, El Cajon
Submitted At: 9:20am 01-20-22
This will do nothing to reduce crime. Stop infringing on the rights of law abiding gun owners and instead focus on prosecuting the real criminals who are responsible for gun violence! Rich Gubera
Location:
Submitted At: 9:18am 01-20-22
Unconstitutional legislation attempt against gun rights.
Mental health is the issue and there are already laws to address unstable people.
People kill people. Liability should remain with the individual.
David Stephens
Location:
Submitted At: 9:18am 01-20-22
2% of the people cause 98% of our problems. 98% of of our laws are needed for 2% of the people. Support the police in enforcing the laws. Aggressively prosecute those who destroy the community. Stop making excuses for the criminals who repeatedly choose to commit crimes against others. Please don’t target the law-abiding pillars of your community to virtue signal about a non-problem. This proposal is not fair or right and is a waste of taxpayer money and your time.
Lance Barglowski
Location: 28166, Troutman
Submitted At: 9:16am 01-20-22
Y our unconstitutional back room proposal must not be passed. Legal gun owners should not have to pay a tax that really is a gun registry scheme. Vote this down.
Thank Y ou
Chris Roman
Location: 92346, Highland
Submitted At: 9:15am 01-20-22
I oppose this proposal. It is unconstitutional an must be put to a stop. We need to tighten laws on criminals not tax the law abiding people!
Robert Burroughs
Location: 85710, Tucson
Submitted At: 9:14am 01-20-22
This measure will do nothing to stem use of illegal guns by people that do not obey laws anyway. Please do not succumb to the "guns are bad" philosophy.
Mark Mccollum
Location: 98092, Auburn
Submitted At: 9:13am 01-20-22
Leave our gun rights alone. The 2A is our law abiding citizens right.
James Griffin
Location: 95003, Aptos
Submitted At: 9:13am 01-20-22
As a 50 year property owner in San Jose I am disappointed at this attempt to punish law abiding gun owners and not the criminals who are out of control.
Clifford Flores
Location: 95035, MILPITAS
Submitted At: 9:13am 01-20-22
There are already enough gun laws. Criminals, by definition, will not follow those currently on the books. To put a tax on law-abiding gun owners is a crime in itself! (I was a teacher at Mathson Middle School from 1969-1999 and am familiar with the City of San Jose.)
William Gowder
Location: 90249, Huntington Beach
Submitted At: 9:11am 01-20-22
Do Not pass this ordinance.
Bill Buhlman
Location:
Submitted At: 9:11am 01-20-22
Stop trying to take God given rights away!
Marty Ryzak
Location: 91320-3335, NEWBURY PARK
Submitted At: 9:09am 01-20-22
what happened to punishing criminals? Why is it that lawful gun owners are always the target of anti-gunners? Tim Woodruff
Location: 33026
Submitted At: 9:08am 01-20-22
Oppose taxes on constitutionally protected rights. Back to the 1890's, some politicians had the idea of using poll taxes as a means of preventing freed slaves from exercising their constitutionally protected right to vote in elections. History has shown that this was a bad idea. Despite that, some politicians still favor this idea, and continue to propose a tax as a way of preventing underprivileged citizens, particularly poor minorities, from exercising their 2A protected right.
Robert Leanza
Location: 92584, Menifee
Submitted At: 9:08am 01-20-22
Stop this madness. When our country falls, will YOU somehow be exempt from the actions of our enemies? Jeffery Colvin
Location: 93656, Riverdale
Submitted At: 9:06am 01-20-22
Please do not infringe on the rights of my fellow firearm owners.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 9:06am 01-20-22
My neighbor was almost killed after opening the door to assist someone he thought was in distress. The intruder forced his way into the home and struck my neighbor on the head with a firearm, causing him to fall into a 3-day coma. The SCCSO searched for the assailant, and told me he abandoned his firearm somewhere on my property and to be on the look out if he returns for it. Please do not pass this ordinance in our time of need; it discourages responsible firearm ownership when we need it most.
Patricia Cody
Location: 95118, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:06am 01-20-22
I have done NOTHING wrong, have never been in trouble with the law, and work hard for my money and yet the city council continues to treat me as if I'm a criminal. As if the crime and violence in our city is MY fault and not the fault of those doing the crime to begin with. And I should not be penalized for exercising a right to enjoy a hobby that brings me joy and allows me to protect myself and my family.
Henry Hess
Location: 80918, Colorado Springs
Submitted At: 9:04am 01-20-22
Do not enact this proposal.
Eliot Kaagan
Location: 92029, Escondido
Submitted At: 9:04am 01-20-22
This is an unjust proposal that will do absolutely nothing to reduce crime, it will only serve to disarm and divide responsible and moral citizens. Additionally, this scheme appears to be a discriminatory tax on only some of the good citizens of San Jose--how is that even justifiable.
Lois Kurowski
Location: 60067, Palatine
Submitted At: 9:03am 01-20-22
Stop picking on innocent gun owners and start jailing criminals.
David Clasen
Location: 91384, Castaic
Submitted At: 9:02am 01-20-22
Y ou are infringing on my Constitutional right to possess and protect my family and myself. Please stop this action.
Michael Brors
Location: 94555, Fremont
Submitted At: 9:01am 01-20-22
The LIABILITY INSURANCE REQUIREMENT AND GUN HARM REDUCTION FEE is nothing but crazy anti 2nd amendment garbage. It's yet another attempt to restrict law abiding gun owners and businesses through ridiculous additional costs and fees. The people who put this in should be permanently removed from office or fired for attempting to violate peoples 2nd amendment rights.
Roberto Herniman
Location: 94063, Redwood City
Submitted At: 9:01am 01-20-22
If the problem is Gun Crime, maybe fight and stop criminals with stolen firearms. This places an unfair tax on law abiding citizens. Do you think this will impact a criminal who break into a home/car and steals a firearm(s)? Do you think after they commit a crime, they are going to make sure they pay this tax. Use common sense.
Tom Rueb
Location: 73007, Arcadia
Submitted At: 9:01am 01-20-22
Y ou can't tax without representation. Don't pass it.
Colion Noir
Location:
Submitted At: 9:00am 01-20-22
"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." - U.S. Constitution - Second Amendment This only harms legal gun owners and does nothing to address criminals who commit crimes. This will have no impact on gun crime in San Jose.
Rick Dexter
Location: 9512@, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:00am 01-20-22
This is a constitutional infringement and will involve costly litigation. I do not want my tax dollars spent this way.
Harriet Tateyama
Location: 90505, 2609 West 233rd Street
Submitted At: 8:59am 01-20-22
This proposed ordinance will do nothing to reduce crime. What is the real purpose? Brent Hammel
Location: 46783, Roanoke
Submitted At: 8:59am 01-20-22
No! The 2nd Amendment is the law of the land!
Sandy Szabo
Location: 90404, Santa Monica
Submitted At: 8:58am 01-20-22
The right to bear arms is a right given to every citizen of the United States. As government leaders, you are aware of this fact. If you are not aware then I suggest you read the constitution. Please don't do this foolish thing.
Hector Pimienta
Location: 91740, GLENDORA
Submitted At: 8:56am 01-20-22
Don't pass this law
Steven Turoski
Location: 98801, Wenatchee
Submitted At: 8:54am 01-20-22
DO NOT PASS THIS ORDINANCE!
Frederick Lewis
Location: 03901, BERWICK
Submitted At: 8:50am 01-20-22
I urge you to you to not pass this ordinance. This is exactly how the communists and NAZI's started.
Mel Rymer
Location:
Submitted At: 8:47am 01-20-22
I urge you to vote against this Ordinance !
John Sampson
Location: 95138
Submitted At: 8:43am 01-20-22
I oppose any tax on firearm owners by the city of San Jose (and the state of California for that matter). The Agenda Item 4.1 22-045 Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance will do nothing to reduce crime nor harm done by criminal acts. It simply places responsible, law abiding, gun owners on a weapon registration list and taxes them for being responsible and law abiding.
James Pritchett
Location: 30549, Jefferson
Submitted At: 8:39am 01-20-22
Tax, is what got the king George thrown out, please don't make the same mistake. camie martini
Location: 92128, San Diego
Submitted At: 8:37am 01-20-22
I am opposed to tax on purchasing a firearm, which is a constitutional right. I am also opposed to gun registries or any legislated process that may lead to registering.
Camie Martini
LLOYD HUDSON
Location: 85710-2254, TUCSON
Submitted At: 8:37am 01-20-22
The very title of this proposed encroachment on every citizen's basic rights is ludicrous. Charging a tax and/or requiring specific insurance appears to be an attempt to "register" firearms amongst your citizenry. Unfortunately, the right to keep and bear arms is repeated in the California constitution from the U.S. constitution, also a requirement for membership in the United States.
Ezra West
Location: 29706, Chester
Submitted At: 8:34am 01-20-22
Who do you idiots think you are? Y ou cannot oppose the 2nd Amendment. The right to bear arms and protect yourself and your family is in the Bill of Rights. Are all of you piss poor democrats that are trying to turn our once great country into a socialist country? All of you need to pray to our Lord and Savior because of your stupidity.
Ezra West
Stanley Ault
Location: 94513, Brentwood
Submitted At: 8:34am 01-20-22
I've owned guns since childhood, and so has everyone I know, yet I don't know anyone who has ever used a gun to cause harm. Taxing law abiding people who choose to exercise a right guaranteed by the 2nd amendment is unreasonable, because they are not the ones causing harm. Perhaps you should tax anyone who is convicted of using a gun while committing a crime. Y our proposed tax is unreasonable, and infringes upon a right that is guaranteed by the US constitution.
David Jones
Location: 84403, Ogden
Submitted At: 8:33am 01-20-22
This is a pathetic attempt at controlling gun ownership in a time when “de-funding the police” has made our neighborhoods much more dangerous and the potential to require a gun for home protection much more likely.
Erman Croney
Location: 65791, Thayer
Submitted At: 8:30am 01-20-22
Dear People, if you want any security of your own, you better stop this foolishness now. The 2nd amendment is a foundational stone of our society to exist. Instead of taxing everything you can find, you need to stop and consider what you can do without. Get off our 2nd Amendment now! Leave it alone. Y ou are doing exactly what the law says you cannot do! Shall not be infringed!! Abide by this rule, or you will destroy yourselves, along with many others - over your greedy desire for money.
michael DAgostino
Location: 13082-9775, Kirkville
Submitted At: 8:29am 01-20-22
STOP THIS NONSENCE
Barb Margan
Location: 54822, cameron
Submitted At: 8:27am 01-20-22
i oppose!
Alan Farrell
Location: 78114, Floresville
Submitted At: 8:26am 01-20-22
Great plan you got there California! Harass the legal owners and ignore the criminals! Robert Biamonte
Location: 19320, West Brandywine
Submitted At: 8:13am 01-20-22
The right of gun ownership shall not be infringed. This tax will only allow the wealthier income people to afford the ability to defend themselves in light of the defund the police movement. Who will you call when you are in danger?
Bob Boyd
Location: 29588, Myrtle Beach
Submitted At: 8:11am 01-20-22
Keep your hands off our guns!!!
Kenneth Johns
Location: 17603, Lancaster
Submitted At: 8:09am 01-20-22
DO NOT PASS THIS UNCONSTITUTIONAL BILL OR YOU WILL GET A BEAT DOWN IN COURT!!! I THINK
CALIFORNIA HAS LED THE WAY IN MAKING STUPID CHOICES TO TRY TO FIX PROBLEMS THAT THEY HAVE CREATED!!! SO DON'T MAKE ANOTHER ONE.
Tim Kelly
Location: 80118, Larkspur
Submitted At: 8:08am 01-20-22
The right to bear arms is a right and not a priviledge founded in the Constitution of the United States. Taxing a citizen so that they can express a God given (not government given) right shows the blatant disrespect and disregard that supporters of this ordinance have for the Constitution. Criminals will still get guns and won't be paying the tax, that is almost guaranteed since criminals don't follow laws which should be obvious to anyone with common sense. Respectfully.
Michael Paquette
Location: 92624, Capistrano Beach
Submitted At: 8:08am 01-20-22
This move to pass this law is wrong !! It will do nothing to stop bad people from doing bad things. All it will do is penalize law abiding citizens to be able to protect themselves from bad people. Use common sense and save the city a lot of time and money by not introducing this bad law. Y our next stop will be in court.
Clinton Pfennig
Location: 99005, Colbert
Submitted At: 8:04am 01-20-22
Why are you insistently trying to abolish the 2nd amendment through devious methods please don't let this pass.
Steven Phillips
Location: 96148, Tahoe Vista
Submitted At: 8:03am 01-20-22
"Taxation With Out Reprsentation"
Rod Leger
Location:
Submitted At: 8:02am 01-20-22
Do not pass this bill. Law abiding gun owners are not the problem.
Criminals do not care about the laws.
That is why they are criminals.
This will do nothing to prevent gun violence.
Richard Stutsman
Location: 94960, San Anselmo
Submitted At: 7:59am 01-20-22
Do not pass ordinance. It is a violation of our constitutional rights. . james goddard
Location: 74012, Broken Arrow
Submitted At: 7:59am 01-20-22
donot pass this bill
Elaine Hage
Location:
Submitted At: 7:57am 01-20-22
Taxing gun owners will provide a gun registry for the government, which is a threat to second amendment rights.
Reggie Redmond
Location: 98448, TACOMA
Submitted At: 7:56am 01-20-22
Do not pass this bill. Respect the 2nd Amendments.
Michael Sullivan
Location: 91911, Chula vista
Submitted At: 7:54am 01-20-22
Please respect the 2A of the US constitution. Y ou attempt for Gun Harm Reduction is misplace against good people. Enforce your current criminal laws.
Dianna Key
Location: 72076-7601, Jacksonville
Submitted At: 7:53am 01-20-22
Guns are not the problem--truly a human problem
James Zabek
Location: 65721, Ozark
Submitted At: 7:51am 01-20-22
I would respectfully remind the council that criminals do no legally purchase or register guns. Should the council wish to reduce harm caused by criminals, I would suggest a tax be placed on criminals committing crimes with guns, instead of law-abiding firearm owners. Clearly, such a tax would need to be levied after the criminal is apprehended, but that saves money as the filing of charges and tax levy may be issued together.
Jack Voth
Location: 33957, Sanibel Island
Submitted At: 7:50am 01-20-22
The criminals will be the only benefactor of this bill
Fred Hartman
Location: 93455, Santa Maria
Submitted At: 7:50am 01-20-22
We already pay for our freedom!
Adrian Gray
Location: 81625, Craig
Submitted At: 7:50am 01-20-22
Do not penalize law abiding citizens with another tax against a constitutional freedom. Penalize the offenders of laws that are already on the books.
Robert Tabaka
Location: 94513, Brentwood
Submitted At: 7:48am 01-20-22
Go after the criminals not law abiding gun owners.
Mark Bayer
Location: 92555, Moreno Valley
Submitted At: 7:44am 01-20-22
I suggest that if this tax is imposed that the City of San Jose be prepared for a few Court battles.
Bobby Frasier
Location: 37663, kingsport
Submitted At: 7:44am 01-20-22
We do not need any gun tax or new gun laws. Y ou need to leave people alone and mind your own bussiness.
Leave guns alone and punish the criminals more, if not for gun owners it would not be safe to go out of your house. Most people that want these crazy laws have several body guards with guns, take that away from them and see how happy they are. Most americans are on their own to defend them self.
George Norwood
Location: 70791, Zachary
Submitted At: 7:43am 01-20-22
I am very much against this!!!
STOP taxing us more each day!!!
Laura Jensen
Location: 80550, Windsor
Submitted At: 7:43am 01-20-22
Just as it is wrong to tax people who speak their minds or refuse a search without a warrant, it is equally wrong to impose a tax for exercising Second Amendment rights. And in what other circumstance would you punish law- abiding citizens for the crimes of others?
Dave Holub
Location: 18621-2805, Hunlock Creek
Submitted At: 7:42am 01-20-22
I oppose this measure for the simple fact that in order to tax certain firearms and/or ammo, it implies that the owner specifies the firearm that they possess and by default, creates a registry of gun ownership. This amounts total affront to possession and gives government the means to confiscate said firearms as they see fit which is in direct violation of the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America.
Jeffrey Sorce
Location: 32744, Lake Helen
Submitted At: 7:39am 01-20-22
Please ask the people if they would like to remove criminals with illegal guns or legally armed citizens with legal rights to guns. Everyone seems to be asking the wrong questions. My preference is to eradicate the criminals.
Y ou people are always going in the wrong direction.
Steve Hochreiter
Location: 76901, San Angelo
Submitted At: 7:38am 01-20-22
I am not in favor of this law. Y ou should tax the criminals for their actions and prosecute them. We need to follow the existing laws for guns, not make law abiding citizens pay for their second amendment right.
Brenda McCoy
Location: 50125, Indianola
Submitted At: 7:38am 01-20-22
This is so questionable and unethical.
Prosecute the offenders not the law abiding citizens.
Anthony Rinna
Location: 48183, TRENTON
Submitted At: 7:32am 01-20-22
DO NOT PUT A TAX ON GUNS
Richard Dougherty
Location: 80135, Sedalia
Submitted At: 7:30am 01-20-22
This is a tax on the Second Amendment and is un continual! If you want to stop gun violence, prosecute offenders to the full extent of the laws on the books.
Get rid of week prosecutors!
This is not rocket science!
Gary Schmitt
Location: 18470, Clifford Twp
Submitted At: 7:27am 01-20-22
No comment.
Michael Hyde
Location: 17406, Y ork
Submitted At: 7:26am 01-20-22
This is nothing but an unconstitutional back door gun registry.
Roger Hurst
Location: 98030, Kent
Submitted At: 7:25am 01-20-22
Stop criminals, not law abiding citizens
David Dye
Location:
Submitted At: 7:21am 01-20-22
So you think that the criminals are going to register too? chadwick conner
Location: 70508, lafayette
Submitted At: 7:19am 01-20-22
We don't need any more rules for guns. The law has proved that criminals still get guns and no of those laws work at all. Instead of new laws how about you start figuring out how to keep guns out of people's hands that aren't allowed to own them.
Michael Crain
Location: 59102, Billings
Submitted At: 7:19am 01-20-22
Outlawing guns only harms law abiding citizens. The criminals will always have guns. If you take away the second amendment rights given in the Constitution of the United States, the supreme law of the land, the bad guys will have easy pickings as law abiding citizens will not be able to protect themselves. All you have to do is look at the lawlessness and violence during the recent riots.
Michael Lilley
Location: 63701, Cape Girardeau
Submitted At: 7:17am 01-20-22
Y our proposed firearms tax clearly violates the Second Amendment to our Constitution. It ultimately serves to facilitate a gun registry, which, as history has shown, facilitates confiscation. The Constitution exists to thwart moves precisely like this one. The Second Amendment is just as legitimate as the other 10 comprising our Bill of Rights. If you want to rescind it, do so constitutionally.
M B
Location:
Submitted At: 7:15am 01-20-22
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!!! In any way,Learn to comprehend the constitution Don Morris
Location: 76310, WICHITA FALLS
Submitted At: 7:15am 01-20-22
Do you think a tax will deter criminals? They will not be paying a tax or even buying gun legally for that matter.
Brian Hunter
Location: 21237, Rosedale
Submitted At: 7:10am 01-20-22
Unfair and makes no sense in how this will affect reducing illegal gun use and crime. Law enforcement and stiff criminal penalties are what’s needed. If you really care, focus on the real issues.
JOHN EIRICH
Location: 45255-3412, CINCINNATI
Submitted At: 7:05am 01-20-22
Y ou're setting a terrible precedent if you want to tax a constitutional right. Next the Republicans will be setting a poll tax to vote. Y ou can't have it both ways. I might not be local but these kind of terrible decisions eventually impact our whole nation and the rights of the people should not be taxed. If you don't like the right, change the constitution.
Charles Colby
Location: 16933-9648, Mansfield
Submitted At: 6:57am 01-20-22
This is an outrageous invasion of privacy on citizens of the United States. Shame on you for trying this back door approach to a gun registry!
Tom Drago
Location:
Submitted At: 6:56am 01-20-22
This is un-Constitutional! Y ou can’t tax people’s Constitutional rights! Lawrence Hurd
Location: 03865, Plaistow
Submitted At: 6:54am 01-20-22
Y our attempt to bring in a back door registry will fail.. One people are one TAXED enough, Two do you really think they are going to tell if the own them of not.. Three who do you people think you are? Y ou won't be there next year or this year, you will surly be voted out!! Four this stuff will end up in court just to slow it down and buy time to remove you all so in closing you are done!!!
Aatif Motivators
Location:
Submitted At: 6:52am 01-20-22
The Sims was originally designed as an architecture simulator, with sims only there to evaluate the builds <a href="https://bc.game">BC Game</a>
JOHAN VANKESTEREN
Location: 98248, Ferndale
Submitted At: 6:52am 01-20-22
WE JUST SAY NO !!
to this tax?
Jeffrey Grosser
Location: 04578, Wiscasset
Submitted At: 6:51am 01-20-22
I venimantly oppose any kind of gun tax, especially where gun ownership is a private matter and 2nd Amendment rights can not be in any way tread upon by government, or any person. A tax would open up the knowledge of ownership to the general public, and other persons since tax records are public record and is a back door approach to create a gun registry which no one is entitled to create.
Terry Scott
Location: 89447, Y erington
Submitted At: 6:49am 01-20-22
There are thousand of your constituents moving here to Nevada please do not continue to encourage any more to leave
It’s Stu iPod to lose law abiding citizens for stupidly gun laws pledestopwit this idioticyaffevct. Everyone who wants a Gunn for self defense was
Mark KELLER
Location: 14894, Wellsburg
Submitted At: 6:49am 01-20-22
This is an indecent bill to be passed, besides that we have all ready paid sales tax on our guns.This is totally against our second amendment . What would you feel if you had to pay taxes for taxes every year on everything you buy (car, Clothes,Gas,auto registrations) over and over from the time you buy them. Start being an American in stead of a Communist in America.
Eugene Owings
Location: 28659, N. Wilkesboro
Submitted At: 6:48am 01-20-22
Y ou will only be taxing the legal guns not the ones owned by felons.
Charlie Eidelman
Location: 48103, Ann Arbor
Submitted At: 6:45am 01-20-22
The gun grabbers in San Jose, CA, are on the move.
They're planning to pass a gun ownership tax next Tuesday - which is really just a backdoor attempt at creating an illegal gun registry!
Neal Giles
Location: 29349, INMAN
Submitted At: 6:45am 01-20-22
What will be next? Steak knifes, hammers, golf clubs?
Men professing themselves to be wise, become fools.
Joe Garrett
Location: 78133, Canyon Lake
Submitted At: 6:41am 01-20-22
Does the council sincerely expect citizens to admit voluntarily to gun ownership to be further taxed?! I do not believe that this item is in the best interest of the citizens or the city itself. Perhaps a less intrusive result could be achieved by a look at fraud, waste and abuse at the city and it's managers/contractors.
Dale Kingan
Location: 34691, Holiday
Submitted At: 6:36am 01-20-22
The problem is you're taxing the same people that not only legal responsible gun owners and the ones that place you in office. Please remember - the ones using the items are criminals and have unregistered guns and won't be paying your illegal tax. Y our fear is misplaced. I bet the ones on your council that oppose the tax are also responsible gun owners and not criminals. Y our focus is out of focus. Increase policing not taxing. California is losing to many people and we don't want them.
William Martindale
Location: 66215, Overland Park
Submitted At: 6:35am 01-20-22
The proposed tax is an infringement of 2nd Amendment rights. Would you put a poll tax on voting? It's the same kind of thing. Using taxes to limit who can do something they have a Constitutional right to do.
Steven Doh
Location: 18974, Warminster
Submitted At: 6:34am 01-20-22
This should be considered an illegal money grab designed to punish law abiding gun owners and once again the criminals are laughing in the face of politicians and the whole way to the bank.
David Barnard
Location: 04730, Houlton
Submitted At: 6:30am 01-20-22
I understand that these days all municipalities need more money. May I suggest that you look inward and find those areas where money is spent unwisely and subject to waste, embezzlement and plain mismanagement.
Such an audit will disclose those much needed funds thus negating the need for additional taxation.
Domenic Amara
Location:
Submitted At: 6:30am 01-20-22
Americans had better take notice. The War on America is ramping up, It's first casualty was Christopher Columbus...Who's next George Washington...1st Amendment ....2nd Amendment. The American Press is a mouthpiece for the cancel cultists, so there's no help there. This gun tax is just another attack on America.
Edwin Beale
Location: 43050, Mount Vernon
Submitted At: 6:29am 01-20-22
This is nothing but a toe in the water to see if it's hot or cold. Bulletin: Winter is here.
Raymond Scipioni
Location: 19020, Benssalem
Submitted At: 6:28am 01-20-22
No gun ownership tax please. People have enough of a tax burden, and taxes should CERTAINL Y NOT be used for penalizing people with whom you disagree.
Not to mention it looks like a registry trick.
Robert Dunstan
Location: 18232, Lansford
Submitted At: 6:28am 01-20-22
cant see your logic but is what I would suspect from the land of fruits&nuts, you will only be taxing the individuals that are law abiding citizens. Start using all the NRA backed gun laws you have to take care of your city gang problems.
Christopher Jordan
Location: 91307, West Hills
Submitted At: 6:24am 01-20-22
Tired of you politicians either taxing or taking away our 2nd amendment rights. Just because you can’t get what you would like, total gun confiscation, you coerce people from excercizing their God given rights by making it so monumentally difficult to do so. It’s people like you that have destroyed our great state of California.
Dave Marsceau
Location: 57017, Colman
Submitted At: 6:22am 01-20-22
Please do not impose this tax. Law abiding gun owners should be respected, not punished! Lewis Krause
Location: 14775, Ripley
Submitted At: 6:21am 01-20-22
How do you propose to tax the illegals and criminals? Y ou can't, but you're going to tax only law abiding citizens of the US, this sounds fair!!!
debbie benson
Location: 32765, Oviedo
Submitted At: 6:21am 01-20-22
my sister in law would be alive today if she had a gun to defend herself from home invasion she was robbed beat up raped and put on a woodpile and set on fire criminal was in prison five times prior Thomas Wilson
Location: 83704, BIOSE
Submitted At: 6:20am 01-20-22
Do not tax
Edward Zakaib
Location: 23229, Henrico
Submitted At: 6:19am 01-20-22
It's very clear that taxation is theft. Taxes hurt those people who are in most need of self defense and protection.
People already pay taxes upon taxes. In stead of heaping burdens and bureaucracy upon citizens, attack the problem of rising crime directly and go after criminals. This is immoral and unconstitutional.
Kathryn Wente
Location: 330424028, Cudjoe Key
Submitted At: 6:18am 01-20-22
We are totally against your Gun Ownership Tax. This amounts to a way to subvert our Second Amendment Rights. Should you pass this, we will send both our support and our money to those who oppose you on this.
This is illegal and unconstitutional.
John Guerrieri
Location: 60089, BUFFALO GROVE, IL, 60089
Submitted At: 6:16am 01-20-22
No comment
Ken Macklin
Location: 46740, Geneva
Submitted At: 6:16am 01-20-22
If you want to loose your city counsel seat than go ahead and tax the law abiding citizens & criminals run free with out consequences.
What's wrong with California common sense has left the state. If you were RED state you would not have so many problems.
Y ou need new leadership like Ronald Reagan. Wake up!
pete zygmont
Location: 85641, Vail
Submitted At: 6:15am 01-20-22
How are you going to tax the criminals? Just tax the law abiding? What are the penalties for a criminal caught in possesion?
Scott Crain
Location: 83647, Mountain Home
Submitted At: 6:13am 01-20-22
No way!!!
Anthony Frerich
Location: 80465, Morrison
Submitted At: 6:11am 01-20-22
Do not tax the gun owners they are only doing there God Given right and the Consititution.
Lyle Hamrick
Location: 43616, Oregon
Submitted At: 6:11am 01-20-22
Please oppose this ordinance.
Arthur Knapp
Location: 23917, Boydton
Submitted At: 6:11am 01-20-22
Shall not be infringed
John Scott
Location: 64443, EASTON
Submitted At: 6:09am 01-20-22
Don't pass gun tax!
Wayne Broughton
Location: 33881, Winter Haven
Submitted At: 6:08am 01-20-22
What us it about that art of the 2nd ammendment stating "...shall not be infringed..." that leftists cannot seem to understand?
TEX MITCHELL
Location: 41008, CARROLLTON
Submitted At: 6:07am 01-20-22
Do not pass the gun tax. The people of this country are already taxed to death. This is a backdoor gun registration.
Leslie Johnston
Location: 99223, Spokane
Submitted At: 6:07am 01-20-22
Although I am NOT in your state, these illegal rules are imposed everywhere which is what you want. Remember, you have elections coming up and your actions WILL have consequences.
Alfred Besser
Location: 67212, Wichita
Submitted At: 6:04am 01-20-22
Such a tax will burden those who are most in need of the means to protect themselves...the poor and working middle class. This tax is regressive and repressive!!
Faye Pence
Location: 32533, Cantonment
Submitted At: 6:02am 01-20-22
Do not tax gun ownership. Y ou are seeking to limit gun ownership which is against our Constitution. And you are seeking to track legal ownership which was one of the first steps toward Social Democracy which is the Nazi party. Y ou should be doing all you can to track illegal guns and their possessors which is your true problem. It is a lazy government which limits law abiding citizens and protects the unlawful.
Joseph Fowler
Location: 12143, Ravena
Submitted At: 5:59am 01-20-22
Putting a tax on a right of the people is wrong. This tax will make American citizens who live in poverty unable to afford to exercise their rights. Taxing people for this will have a larger effect on people of color than anyone else.
Are you going to start taxing people for speaking next? Kenneth Baker
Location: 66049, Lawrence
Submitted At: 5:59am 01-20-22
No firearm Tax!
David Dolcater
Location: 78736, Austin
Submitted At: 5:56am 01-20-22
Such a tax is unconstitutional at best and just another way for the anti gun fanatics to confiscate everyone' s guns.
Jerry Zeigler
Location: 72576, Salem
Submitted At: 5:54am 01-20-22
NO GUN TAX.
john santuci
Location: 32139, georgetown
Submitted At: 5:54am 01-20-22
how many criminals will be paying this tax?
Charley Beltz
Location: 50644, Independence
Submitted At: 5:51am 01-20-22
Tax on guns will not solve any problems
Dale Bennett
Location: 06438, Haddam
Submitted At: 5:50am 01-20-22
Gun ownership is a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT. It is UNCONSTITUTIONAL to require a citizen to pay a tax to exercise a constitutional right. Can you imagine paying a tax to exercise free speech? William Cooley
Location: 23111, Mechanicsville
Submitted At: 5:47am 01-20-22
Please vote no on another attempt by the democrats to disarm the American public. If this bill is passed, the money will be used to try and take away the second amendment rights of the citizens of the United States of America. The American public all know this is about control. What is going to happen to this country when you take away all the guns from the good guys? Do you actually think that you are going to take the guns from the criminals, and they are going to pay taxes on their guns? Daniel JACOBS
Location: 14606, Rochester
Submitted At: 5:41am 01-20-22
Y ou do not want to do this! IF Y ou want to truly represent your constituents/people, then do not violate yor oath of office to defend and uphold the Constitution.
Janet Laignel
Location: 38231, Henry
Submitted At: 5:39am 01-20-22
Really?? Y ou actually think criminals are going to fess up to having a gun? I would say you need to tax intelligent thought but unfortunately you wouldn't collect a penny.
Matt Franzoy
Location: 92646, Huntington Beach
Submitted At: 5:39am 01-20-22
Please DO NOT impose an unjust tax on gun owners!
Walter Yasiejko
Location: 19701, Bear
Submitted At: 5:36am 01-20-22
I strongly oppose this proposal to infringe on our basic second amendment civil rights. Many years ago southern Democrats both tried and did in fact institute a “Poll Tax” to suppress the black vote. This new proposal also disproportionately suppresses lower income, mostly minority people from exercising their basic second amendment civil rights. Please use basic common sense and fairness, and vote NO against this ill conceived violation of our basic human rights for self defense.
Richard Haid
Location: 16323, Franklin
Submitted At: 5:34am 01-20-22
In 1949 the courts decided that you can not tax a constitutional right.
Frank Bishop
Location: 17202, Chambersburg
Submitted At: 5:30am 01-20-22
Back door gun control.
Malcolm Nelson
Location: 32577, MOLINO
Submitted At: 5:26am 01-20-22
This is just backdoor gun control!
MICHAEL BAHNMILLER
Location: 48116, Brighton
Submitted At: 5:25am 01-20-22
Another illegal tax - not a good idea. Enforce the laws that are already on the books!
DAVE COOK
Location: 99323, Burbank
Submitted At: 5:17am 01-20-22
PLEASE CEASE WITH YOUR PLAN TO IMPLEMENT A GUN TAX,,THIS WILL BE RULED AS
UNCONSTITUTIONAL IF FOR NO OTHER REASON THAT IT CANNOT BE IMPLEMENTED FAIRL Y ,,,THERE
WILL BE NO ONE OF THE CRIMINAL ELEMENT THAT WILL BE PAYING ANY PART OF YOUR TAX,SO IT
WOULDN'T BE FAIR TO TAX ONL Y THE LAW ABIDING GUN OWNERS,, AND THAT MY FRIENDS IS
DISCRIMINATION,,
bruce johnson
Location: 97624, Chiloquin
Submitted At: 5:15am 01-20-22
I think it's time California picked up a copy of the constitution and gave it a good read because this should not even be up for debate. Do not pass this ordinance. I agree! Kay Bates
Location: 78250, San Antonio,
Submitted At: 5:15am 01-20-22
I appose to any infringement on my 2nd Amendment rights.
Erno C
Location: 12569, Pleasant Valley
Submitted At: 5:14am 01-20-22
Restore no/ low bail
Commit a crime w/a weapon 25 yrs minimum prison hard labor Brian Nash
Location: 23116-4843, Mechanicsville
Submitted At: 5:13am 01-20-22
I think it's time California picked up a copy of the constitution and gave it a good read because this should not even be up for debate. Do not pass this ordinance.
Charles Buchanan
Location: 34221, PALMETTO
Submitted At: 5:11am 01-20-22
I'm opposed to ANY infringement on my 2nd Amendment rights and will vote accordingly. dennis lanoux
Location:
Submitted At: 5:09am 01-20-22
what part of Shall not Infringe do you understand, if you want to reduce crime start by enforcing law against illegals, you do nothing to reduce crime by restricting legal law biding citizens Shirley Butler
Location: 38341, Holladay
Submitted At: 5:08am 01-20-22
They are taking real good care of their communist buddies!!! pierre gendron
Location: 37659, JONESBOROUGH
Submitted At: 5:07am 01-20-22
We are Taxed enough like it is and this is also unconstitutional Eileen Martin
Location: 28170, Wadesboro
Submitted At: 5:02am 01-20-22
The constitution was to protect the people from such infringements of our freedoms.
Tricia Moore
Location: 88203, Roswell
Submitted At: 5:01am 01-20-22
As A long-standing supporter of our constitution, I adamantly oppose any tax or restrictions on legal gun owners.
DO NOT implement tax.
Richard Horton
Location:
Submitted At: 5:00am 01-20-22
This is just back door gun regulation. It will be abused and it’s unconstitutional.
Rick Fette
Location:
Submitted At: 5:00am 01-20-22
Do not pass 4.1 22-045
Brian wing
Location: 61032, Freeport
Submitted At: 4:56am 01-20-22
Please do not pass a tax like this. this will make a lot more criminals for you to have to imprison and support with money you don't have.
Tom Bozikis
Location: 47715, Evansville
Submitted At: 4:56am 01-20-22
I am not a resident of your community, but I find your proposal perplexing as I don’t see how such a proposal can be enforced in a practical way. Will those who commit crimes using a firearm voluntarily provide their information to be taxed? This agenda item seems to be divisive, and seems to create a separate class of citizens.
James Lawson
Location:
Submitted At: 4:53am 01-20-22
If you are after illegal guns why "tax" legal gun owners? Daniel Rainey
Location: 27284, Kernersville
Submitted At: 4:50am 01-20-22
Do not penalize citizens who are using their God given rights to protect themselves and their families. This is just wrong.
Mark Smith
Location:
Submitted At: 4:50am 01-20-22
This is an unconstitutional restriction on a fundamental right to bear arms. Who’s going to enforce this law? Police? Who’s going to comply? No one… just makes leaders look foolish and political. Criminals won’t pay taxes on their guns of course. This isn’t about helping or protecting anyone.
Sandra Deitering
Location: 85610, Elfrida
Submitted At: 4:48am 01-20-22
This move has to be unconstitutional. Back off the legal gun owners! John Nichols
Location: 65270, Moberly
Submitted At: 4:47am 01-20-22
This is totally unconstitutional. The 2nd amendment under attack. Stop the Stupid on the Left.
Deborah Dise
Location: 23456, Virginia Beach
Submitted At: 4:45am 01-20-22
This is just another attack on the 2nd Amendment Right. Do NOT pass this! Stephen Papp
Location:
Submitted At: 4:45am 01-20-22
I oppose Agenda 4.1 22-045. This is just another effort by government to fill their coffers and restrict constitutional rights at the same time.
Dave Titus
Location: 32976, Sebastian
Submitted At: 4:44am 01-20-22
HEIL!
David Johnson
Location: 32583, Milton
Submitted At: 4:43am 01-20-22
Don't let the camel get it's nose in the tent!
Ana Williams
Location: 32092, Saint Augustine
Submitted At: 4:38am 01-20-22
Y ou have no right to tax gun owners, we are law abiding citizens and you have no right to violate our God given rights. Stop abusing your power, you were put in office by the people and we can vote you out. Y ou work for us, we don't work for you.
DANNY MALONE
Location: 73160, Terrell
Submitted At: 4:36am 01-20-22
As one who has fought two wars for this country I firmly oppose this unconstitutional restriction on legal gun ownership. Are knives and ball bats next as they kill more people than guns.
Jason Wagenaar
Location: 51231, Archer
Submitted At: 4:32am 01-20-22
Do not pass this
fredrick koppenhafer
Location: 80603, Brighton
Submitted At: 4:31am 01-20-22
I am in extreme opposition to the gun harm reduction ordinance. It is no more than another government money grab, and will have no effect on violent crime of any sort. It is unconstitutional and will hinder law abiding citizens particularly those of lower income from providing themselves protection.
William Whaley
Location: 22578, White Stone
Submitted At: 4:28am 01-20-22
Gentlemen and Ladies, why would you pass such an ordinance? Y ou know you will be sued and wind up in court.
Its unconstitutional!
Stephen Chauvin
Location: 70070, Luling
Submitted At: 4:26am 01-20-22
I oppose Agenda Item 4.122 gun harm reduction ordinance.
Robin Waters
Location: 03865, Plaistow
Submitted At: 4:23am 01-20-22
I oppose Agenda Item 4.122 gun harm reduction ordinance.
William Cummings
Location: 46278, Indianapolis
Submitted At: 4:22am 01-20-22
NOT NO, BUT HELLLLLLLLLL NOOOOOOOOO !!!!!!!!!!!
Sarah Repp
Location: 62693, Williamsville
Submitted At: 4:17am 01-20-22
I oppose Agenda Item 4.1 22-045 Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance. Such an ordinance would be unconstitutional because it would create a registry of gun owners, and gun registration is illegal. Please do not pass a gun ownership tax.
Nellie McConnell
Location: 92274, Thermal
Submitted At: 4:14am 01-20-22
We should be training everyone to learn gun safety and shooting.
Rex Honodel
Location:
Submitted At: 4:11am 01-20-22
I oppose Agenda Item 4.1 22-045 Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance. Such an ordinance would be unconstitutional because it would create a registry of gun owners, and gun registration is illegal. Please do not pass a gun ownership tax.
Tim Allen
Location: 12189, Watervliet
Submitted At: 4:11am 01-20-22
This ordinance does nothing to prevent crime. It is an illegal "work around" the Second Amendment to infringe on law abiding gun owners rights.
Gary Kuzdas
Location: 53129
Submitted At: 4:07am 01-20-22
Please do not pass this tax ordinance. It’s infringement of our constitutional right to bear arms as law biting citizens.
gerald felten
Location: 32257, Jacksonville
Submitted At: 4:03am 01-20-22
I oppose
Christopher Crum
Location: 27604, Raleigh
Submitted At: 4:01am 01-20-22
The federal government already regulates the purchase of firearms. This is not needed and will not do anything for reduction in crime. Show me the research that proves strict gun control reduces or eliminates crime.
Chris McNeil
Location: 28722, Columbus
Submitted At: 4:00am 01-20-22
Please do not pass this tax ordinance. It’s infringement of our constitutional right to bear arms as law biting citizens of these United States.
Christine Q
Location:
Submitted At: 3:59am 01-20-22
I oppose any form of gun registry!
John Hurst
Location: 34787, Winter Garden
Submitted At: 3:58am 01-20-22
YOU ARE ALSO
Pamela Gonzales
Location: 81212, Buena Vista
Submitted At: 3:58am 01-20-22
It’s no one’s business if I have a gun. As a property owner in California I oppose this registration.
Gerald Liebsch
Location: 74135, Tulsa
Submitted At: 3:56am 01-20-22
Stop treading on our constitutional rights!
Chris Thomas
Location: 33917, Fort Myers
Submitted At: 3:56am 01-20-22
The constitution does not include taxing the right to keep and bear arms. This is another attempt to remove rights of the American people. It will do nothing to prevent crime. Criminals do not pay taxes. It is a despicable attempt to disarm the people of San Jose. It is wrong.
Timothy Wolosz
Location: 44111, Cleveland
Submitted At: 3:51am 01-20-22
Stop registering guns
Richard Wheeler
Location: 45011, Fairfield Township
Submitted At: 3:51am 01-20-22
Talk about infringement. I never be visiting San Jose again if this is passed.
Joshua Thacker
Location: 63766, Millersville
Submitted At: 3:46am 01-20-22
While I do not live in your area, I do have family there. My family and I are highly opposed to such nonsense. This will do nothing to stop crime. It will backfire and make things worse for law abiding citizens like us! Think of ways to enforce current laws against crime before punishing law abiding citizens!! Robert Schott
Location:
Submitted At: 3:44am 01-20-22
Taxation without representation! Being part of the socialistic state of California what other rights are you going to tax? Free speech? Voting?
But you say guns can be used for protection. Are you going to tax my pocket knife? My fists? My feet? Y ou make me want to vomit.
Michael Pruetti
Location: 30087, Stone Mountain
Submitted At: 3:43am 01-20-22
Y ou Communist Democrats always want to get rid of guns & create a society that only has the government to protect you. Then the people have no way to protect themselves against tyrannical totalitarian governments communistic
in nature just like New Zealand & Australia !!!
Wake Up AMERICA _
Allen Johnson
Location: 95123, San Jose
Submitted At: 3:41am 01-20-22
It will be a obstructing the intent of the US Constitution. Tax away commie government of Crapafonica! Won't get it from me!
L D
Location: 32347, Perry
Submitted At: 3:34am 01-20-22
THE CONSTITUTION is the law of the land!!! Gun grabbing politicians only degrade the constitution and make everyone in the United States __ weaker to enemies and put YOUR CHILDREN at risk!!! Franklin GRIFFIN
Location: 70517, Breaux Bridge
Submitted At: 3:31am 01-20-22
I hope these politicians did not take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. If they did, they were obviously lying through their teeth.
John Bariel
Location: 83705, Boise
Submitted At: 3:30am 01-20-22
I, personally, feel that it is illegal to tax my right to defend me or mine. Even the thought of a tax like that seems unconstitutional.
cisco barry
Location:
Submitted At: 3:27am 01-20-22
Great post, you have pointed out some excellent points, I as well believe this is a very superb website. <a href="https://totobrand.com/">_____</a>
Hubert Ba
Location: 38059, Newb
Submitted At: 3:27am 01-20-22
Quit trying to take away our guns and freedom no!
Lee Hanson
Location: 82501, Riverton
Submitted At: 3:26am 01-20-22
B.S. liberals
yevgen golubyev
Location: 33487, boca raton
Submitted At: 3:22am 01-20-22
Y ou braking the constitution!!! Stop it!!!
Lawrence Hennigan
Location: 40324, Georgetown
Submitted At: 3:19am 01-20-22
The second amendment is not negotiable. Governments do not have the power to circumvent the constitution.
Chris Callahan
Location: 29067, Kershaw
Submitted At: 3:18am 01-20-22
Do not pass this ordinance!
Linda Schwarz
Location: 34761, Ocoee
Submitted At: 3:16am 01-20-22
Stop the gun tax.
Dick Edwards
Location: 72758, Rogers
Submitted At: 3:15am 01-20-22
Police carry guns to protect themselves.
David Muench
Location: 65109, Jefferson City
Submitted At: 3:11am 01-20-22
This is nothing more then more BS out of Washington DC and the Democrasts power grab.
Philip McMakin
Location: 29349, Inman
Submitted At: 3:10am 01-20-22
This proposed legislation is really just a backdoor attempt at creating an illegal gun registry and is an unconstitutional breach of 2nd Amendment Rights. Please do not pass this bill.
Chris Ketchum
Location: 80439, Evergreen
Submitted At: 3:03am 01-20-22
Looks like San Jose is becoming a communist city. What part of “shall not be infinged” do they not understand? Unacceptable government overreach.
Please cease and desist passing this arbitrary and capricious act.
Respectfully,
Chris Ketchum
Glenn Owens
Location: 29541, Bonneau
Submitted At: 3:02am 01-20-22
Unconstitutional
Johyn Waldrop
Location: 33898, Lake Wales
Submitted At: 3:01am 01-20-22
A tax on gun ownership is an infringement on people's right to possess firearms but what else would you expect from socialist California?
David Grewing
Location: 83547, Polock
Submitted At: 2:51am 01-20-22
Its simply a communist move to disarm the USA for take over , a start because they won't stop until they have us not to be able to defend ourselves and your freedom gone and forced to do whatever they want you to !!! God won't be able to help you either because you gave up your god given rights !!! Jose Aldecoa
Location: 93705, Fresno
Submitted At: 2:50am 01-20-22
Please do not pass this tax ordinance. It’s infringement of our constitutional right to bear arms as law biting citizens of these United States.
Ernest Miranda
Location: 32577, Molino
Submitted At: 2:48am 01-20-22
Why tax gun owners? There are more people killed with knifes than with guns! What's next? John Skolaut
Location: 28640, Jefferson
Submitted At: 2:42am 01-20-22
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed! Any taxation on firearms ownership is blatant infringement.
Steven Gilmore
Location: 13827, Owego
Submitted At: 2:38am 01-20-22
Burdening law abiding firearm owners addresses nothing. This is in conflict with the second amendment. Do not pass anything in conflict with the United States Constitution.
Regards,
Steven B Gilmore
Ram Weber
Location: 43212
Submitted At: 2:37am 01-20-22
Please Do NOT pass this proposed "tax" ordinance !
BRIAN COOL
Location: 78249, San Antonio
Submitted At: 2:37am 01-20-22
San Jose........shall not infringing?.........you're doing it wrong! Time to propose a new target for unwarranted restrictions .....how about introducing legislation promoting the taxation of passing new legislation? Then we'll see how "common sense" gun laws suddenly aren't common at all once the lawmakers float the bill and not the law- abiding gun owners. Let's start collecting actual funds everytime you want to chip in your 2 cents on how others need to spend theirs!
David Hartman
Location: 35905, Glencoe
Submitted At: 2:36am 01-20-22
No! No! No! What would be next? Taxation purely on the basis of ownership opens the door on taxation on anything. Give me a reason that makes sense for singling out taxing guns. It is authoritarian, tyrannical oppression.
frank deturris
Location: 95120, san jose
Submitted At: 2:32am 01-20-22
do not pass this - it does not address the problem. law-abiding citizens will be penalized - criminals will not be afffected.
Paul Sprague
Location: 43040, Marysville
Submitted At: 2:25am 01-20-22
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed! Any taxation on firearms ownership is blatant infringement.
Randy Harris
Location: 85297, Gilbert
Submitted At: 2:25am 01-20-22
No, I do not support this.
jack miller
Location:
Submitted At: 2:22am 01-20-22
Looking for <a href="https://www.mysavinghub.com/store/reebok-coupons">Reebok student discount </a>? Reebok has been outfitting athletes and style icons in all sorts for decades. Y ou can get a great shoe style, if you're buying for young kids, trendy teenagers, cool adults, or fun seniors. It specializes in a variety of sporting apparel for all sports such as basketball, hockey, football and even track and field, including accessories and athletic shoes.
Robert Edinger
Location: 44689, Wilmot
Submitted At: 2:17am 01-20-22
Y ou are infringing on the rights of the people.
Wanda Payne
Location: NC
Submitted At: 2:14am 01-20-22
Just no that's all
Ed Huck
Location: 08322, franklinville
Submitted At: 2:13am 01-20-22
Shall not be infringed?
Ruth Tonder
Location: 21061, Glen Burnie
Submitted At: 2:07am 01-20-22
How dare making your own rules with out the will of the people. Haw dare you few of you changing the laws that it protects it’s citen Ena d
Ruth Tonder
Location: 21061, Glen Burnie
Submitted At: 2:07am 01-20-22
How dare making your own rules with out the will of the people. Haw dare you few of you changing the laws that it protects it’s citen Ena d
Heidi Gendron
Location: 06488, Southbury
Submitted At: 1:53am 01-20-22
This proposed ordinance is not only in violation of the US constition, but is also in violation of anti-discrimintation laws. Y ou can not pass this without facing expensive legal pushback.
Tom Huebner
Location: 45248, Cincinnati
Submitted At: 1:52am 01-20-22
Hurt the criminals not the law abiding citizens.
Robert McCutcheon
Location: 29410, Hanahan
Submitted At: 1:43am 01-20-22
This is both illegal and a violation of our civil rights.
Herman Stanford
Location: 39470, Poplarville
Submitted At: 1:37am 01-20-22
Quit pushing Socialist Communist gun-hating guns grabbing ideas, you stupid politicians! L H
Location: 95950, Santa Clara
Submitted At: 1:36am 01-20-22
I worked for the city of San Jose this has nothing to do with the safety of its citizens. This is just another example of government over reach. The mayor and the council can afford to pay this tax or security for themselves. Hard working people need to be able to protect themselves because the city has gotten rid of the police. If you need help the mayor or the council won’t be there.
Arturo Villegas
Location:
Submitted At: 1:34am 01-20-22
Don't do it you communist traitors!
Brian Centeno
Location:
Submitted At: 1:26am 01-20-22
Do not do this. Y our actions are consistent with petty tyrants throughout history. Recognizing this, it was proscribed by the constitution, ie, in the second amendment. Please look it up as it is important for “leaders” such as yourselves to be somewhat conversant with the foundational laws of our republic. Dumbass commies.
CHARLES SMITH
Location: 60098, Woodstock
Submitted At: 1:03am 01-20-22
DO NOT pass a gun ownership tax! Do NOT pass this proposed ordinance! Michael Portner
Location:
Submitted At: 12:59am 01-20-22
The second ammendment 3quite clear that nothing shall interfear with the RIGHT to own and possess guns. This then becomes a direct violation against our Constitution and must not be tolerated. There are places in the world where this type of stupidity is tolerated. My I gently suggest that you move there if you feel our freedoms here are in conflict with your views and opinions. (need help packing?) Leonard Wiuff
Location: 98002, Auburn
Submitted At: 12:58am 01-20-22
Y eah, don't try this. It is against the Constitution and not a net positive for the prople of the United States or the State of California or the City of San Jose. Please bear in mind that this kind of legislation only restricts the law- abiding Citizen, not the criminals.
Barry Williams
Location: 46902, Kokomo
Submitted At: 12:54am 01-20-22
Y our tax is just a back door effort to great a gun registry, chuck should be outlwed and staunchly opposed ! Barry Williams
Richard Engel
Location: 23452, Virginia Beach
Submitted At: 12:43am 01-20-22
This proposed action violates a number of federal laws not to mention the US Constitution. It will be unenforceable since criminals who misuse firearms already disregard any of laws while law abiding citizens will be forced to bear the brunt of the law's effects. This is a blatant disregard of citizen's rights and obvious scam to generate revenue without addressing the alleged intent to affect gun violence or crime. It is a transparent attempt to violate citizen's civil rights of self defense.
B D
Location:
Submitted At: 12:27am 01-20-22
Backdoor gun registry. While the city is falling apart. Why focus in that? Rick Grant
Location: 29681, Simpsonville
Submitted At: 12:24am 01-20-22
As this is a FREE country , please vote accordingly. Thank w Dave Boehm
Location:
Submitted At: 12:09am 01-20-22
This proposed tax would infringe on one or more Constitutional rights. I'm sure something else could be taxed, if more revenue is needed.
OTOH, if I was a federal bureaucrat and I wanted a list of every law abiding gun owner in the city, I'd get that message to the Mayor and Council.
So please put me down as a "No." And if you don't mind, a roll call vote would help; I'd like to know which Council members listen to We The People, and which ones don't.
Thank you.
Jim Locey
Location: 16946, TIOGA
Submitted At: 12:03am 01-20-22
What part of " INFRINGED " don't you understand?
Ben Longwell
Location: 81625, Craig
Submitted At: 11:58pm 01-19-22
Why would you unconstitutionally tax law abiding citizens that have done NO harm? This is not legal or moral!! Terry Hall
Location:
Submitted At: 11:53pm 01-19-22
This is an ex post facto backdoor registration of legal gun owners who have previously purchased, owned and used guns without ANY gun harm and is a penalty for the mere possession and ownership of a tool under the false premise of liability for gun harm not caused by the owner of the gun (tool). Ex post facto laws are illegal under the Constitution and as such are illegal and void. Penalties (fees for gun harm) assessed to a non-violation are Bills of Attainder also illegal and thereby void.
Jonathan Wackenhut
Location:
Submitted At: 11:52pm 01-19-22
This is another idiotic tax idea from government officials that have forgotten they have a guideline to follow. IT'S CALLED THE CONSTITUTION!!! Being elected does not give you open rule to pass whatever law certain individuals want forced on the American people. The problem doesn't reside in people that want them for protection. The problem is people that want to use them for harm. Start punishing those individuals and leave law abiding citizens alone.
Tom Brown
Location: 62526, Decatur
Submitted At: 11:49pm 01-19-22
Careful what you want to tax. It may come back and bite you. And, by doing so, will the gangbangers and law breakers pay the tax on their illegal weapons? Do you really want to tax honest, law abiding people like this? Roy Delaney
Location: 08723, Brick
Submitted At: 11:46pm 01-19-22
Unreasonable gun laws it is against the second amendment of the constitution!
DONALD HUNT
Location: 99141, Kettle Falls
Submitted At: 11:43pm 01-19-22
Y ou are going after the wrong faction of society. Go after the criminals who, by the very definition, do not obey the law and therefore deserve the full weight of law enforcement upon them. Make the criminals pay, not law-abiding citizens -- AGAIN.
Steve Sweet
Location: 93292, Visalia
Submitted At: 11:38pm 01-19-22
Another oppressive tax on gun ownership and the right to bear arms. Subverting the second amendment is not part of being a law bidding citizen under our constitution. This is one step closer to a power grab by the government. Recouping the cost of gun incidents is a progressive smoke screen for an eventual gun confiscation.
Diane Broome
Location: 95437-5214, FORT BRAGG
Submitted At: 11:38pm 01-19-22
no tax!
Jacob Kaiser
Location: 75851, Lovelady
Submitted At: 11:35pm 01-19-22
Adding a tax to firearms is double taxation without representation, it’s unconstitutional! Y ou can’t get the guns that are illegally owed off your streets or out of illegals hands, but you want to charge the legal owners? I hope the majority of y’all are up for re-election?
Allen Eggleston
Location: 76010, Arlington
Submitted At: 11:34pm 01-19-22
This is an infringement on gun ownership.
james meany
Location: 98277, Oak Harbor
Submitted At: 11:33pm 01-19-22
We do NOT need your tax ideas to stop or hinder private ownership of lawful guns.
Marina Heilman
Location: 98953, Zillah
Submitted At: 11:29pm 01-19-22
When you can successfully get all types of firearms out of the hands of criminals, then and only then shall you worry about law-abiding citizens having access to guns. When you fully dispose of YOUR protection detail, then and only then shall you attempt to dispose of my son's right to protect and defend my children and grandchildren.
Only when you prove you're collecting taxes from all criminals running rampant in your foolishly-run liberal state will taxing all gun owners be reasonable.CA sux.
Timothy Bale
Location: 49938, Ironwood
Submitted At: 11:26pm 01-19-22
Again, you try to impose your mistaken will and ideas on the people of the State of California, and eventually on the United States. Please read the Constitution of the United States of America and abide by it already. We do NOT need your tax ideas to stop or hinder private ownership of lawful guns. Y ou will impose an additional tax burden on the people of the city with the Law Suits that you will bring on. Y our votes will be remembered. Also there is a higher Judge who sees all. Thank you
Tammy Hunter
Location:
Submitted At: 11:22pm 01-19-22
The 2nd Amendment is free given to us by our constitution it should not be taxed. We are already taxed when we purchased our choice of protection. If you don’t see the need for the 2nd Amendment in the world we now live in you must be able to afford to pay someone to protect you. Some of us need to be able to protect ourselves.
RT Rodregez
Location: 9136, San Jose
Submitted At: 11:21pm 01-19-22
Stop interfering with people’s rights
Jim Staker
Location: 83202, Pocatello
Submitted At: 11:17pm 01-19-22
Our constitution has the basics of peaceful society, and tampering with it can only end in disaster. The Right to bear arms is a basic right for the welfare of peaceful living, equal to the need for police, who must use force of arms when peace and security is threatened. There will always be criminals who take advantage when citizens are disarmed, knowing the police cannot be everywhere, nor come quickly enough in most cases. Please leave our basic rights alone. They have been infringed enough.
Fred Cruz
Location: 95357, Modesto
Submitted At: 11:15pm 01-19-22
Law abiding citizens that are gun owners are the best deterrent to crime. It is not a difficult concept to understand.
Just get out of the way!
Timothy Gossett
Location: 40216, Louisville
Submitted At: 11:11pm 01-19-22
Y ou need to concentrate on enforcing existing laws, so if you're going to pass a law, pass one to keep your hands to yourself and your nose in your own business and out of We The People's.
Bob Bob
Location:
Submitted At: 11:07pm 01-19-22
Are you nuts?
D H
Location:
Submitted At: 10:49pm 01-19-22
This is unconstitutional.
stanley daley
Location: 60099, ZION
Submitted At: 10:47pm 01-19-22
natioonal regestry will not work because when the law bying people have rester the weapons the crooks do not Therese Blackwell
Location: 80222, Denver
Submitted At: 10:46pm 01-19-22
Oppose period!
Holli Fields
Location: Albuquerque
Submitted At: 10:45pm 01-19-22
This legislation, in my opinion, would do nothing to reduce crime or create the mind-set of preventing crime or prevent suicides. Our Constitutional RIGHT to protect ourselves is essential and to levy such a tax is Unconstitutional. This legislation would create more paperwork, headaches, and would me more costly for all concerned, and create undesirable consequences surely.
Johnnie Sawyer
Location: 23457, Virginia Beach
Submitted At: 10:37pm 01-19-22
I oppose all acts against our Second Ammendment
Leslie Allen
Location:
Submitted At: 10:37pm 01-19-22
The 2A is a *right*, not a privilege. Do you pay a tax when you want to practice your religion or speak your mind in public? Do you pay to exercise your right against unreasonable search & seizure? All this tax will do is hurt poor communities, especially when governments defund police in communities already overwhelmed w/crime & are now unable to leave their homes for fear of violence.
Stop coddling criminals & start empowering the law abiding to defend themselves w/o government infringement.
Urbiegato Morbidendus
Location: 85233, Gilbert
Submitted At: 10:37pm 01-19-22
"Shall not be infringed..." A quick reminder that George Washington did not negotiate with those who threatened Liberty and Freedom, he SHOT THEM.
Edward Kosewicz
Location: 23805, Petersburg
Submitted At: 10:34pm 01-19-22
How dare you tax a RIGHT! We pay taxes on firearms when we purchase them. No more. It’s the bad guys do you REALL Y Really think they will
Pay taxes NOT. They get guns off the street. Quit trying to punish the tax paying law abiding citizens. And crack down on the bad guys. But of course you feel sorry for them because they are oppressed somehow. I guarantee you I will help fund anyone who runs against you even though I live in Virginia! Leo Bjergo
Location: 93556-1176, RIDGECREST
Submitted At: 10:34pm 01-19-22
New Y ork has the STRICTEST GUN CONTROL in the U.S. It also has THE HIGHEST CRIME RATE IN THE NATION!! In Switzerland, ALL MALES 18+ ARE REQUIRED TO OWN A FIREARM, AND TAKE FIREARMS TRAINING. Switzerland has ONE OF THE LOWEST CRIME RATES IN THE WORLD!! GUNS ARE NOT THE PROBLEM, EVIL PEOPLE ARE!!
Maureen McCarthy
Location: 90266, Manhattan Beach
Submitted At: 10:31pm 01-19-22
Unfair to tax Gun Owners as Bearing Arms is guaranteed in the BILL of RIGHTS. An Ordinance will not deter crimes by criminals only will deter honest people who have guns for self-protection. I am not a Gun Owner but these types of restrictions make me want to go out and buy a gun.
S W
Location:
Submitted At: 10:25pm 01-19-22
Legal gun owners are not the problem. Take guns from criminals, not legal gun owners that have not committed any crimes.
F Smith
Location: 92225
Submitted At: 10:21pm 01-19-22
Y our wasting your time, when the liberals continue on the social BS that’s crossing America your going to wish you were standing behind the guy that has the guns to protect your dumm asses !!!!!! John Lay
Location: 73446, Madill
Submitted At: 10:21pm 01-19-22
Please do not pass any anti gun bills or laws. Thank you.
Ron Acord
Location: 29550, Hartsville
Submitted At: 10:19pm 01-19-22
I am strongly against this proposal.
Thomas Marchese
Location: 93611, Clovis
Submitted At: 10:19pm 01-19-22
This legislation will do nothing to reduce gun violence or harm by firearms. Law abiding citizens do not cause gun violence, it is caused by criminals and non-law abiding people. This legislation will create a diversion from the real problem and most likely result in an increase in gun violence. Please reject this legislation and focus on keeping criminals off of our streets and out of our communities. kim bybee
Location: 83702, Boise
Submitted At: 10:11pm 01-19-22
What part of shall not be infringed dont you get ! Read the constiution! Kevin Cole
Location: 96789, Mililani
Submitted At: 10:02pm 01-19-22
Private property is private property. This is unconstitutional.
David Topolewski
Location: 92064, Poway
Submitted At: 10:01pm 01-19-22
It is a citizen’s right to keep and bear arms, not a favor doled out and taxed by the government. aubrey inscore
Location: 95608, carmichael
Submitted At: 10:01pm 01-19-22
NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE.
Catheryne Shearry
Location:
Submitted At: 9:59pm 01-19-22
Y ou have the right to purchase an automobile. Y ou have to purchase a tag annually. How is gun registration any different. Y ou still have the right to own a gun. Given the number of suicides with guns, the number of victims of spousal abuse killed or injured, and add in the number of attacks on schools, we desperately need a national Registry!
Steven Bodenstab
Location: 60517-1730, Woodridge
Submitted At: 9:56pm 01-19-22
Indiscriminate taxation of the exercise of a United States Citizen's Constitutional RIGHT is an abridgement of that right and, therefore, unconstitutional. Any attempt to levy such a tax is inviting long and costly litigation that must be borne by your constituents' taxes. This wrongheaded proposal is, simply, misguided. rick mckay
Location: 97501, Medford
Submitted At: 9:55pm 01-19-22
tax of any kind will void the second amendment!
Judith Anderson
Location: 76234, Decatur
Submitted At: 9:54pm 01-19-22
It’s our constitutional rights given to us by the founding fathers to beat arms against enemies foreign and domestic and to defend our lives on our property. I am opposed! Robert Sohn
Location: 37421, Chattanooga
Submitted At: 9:50pm 01-19-22
Uphold the Second Amendment. Any provision to tax law abiding citizens for firearms ownership is an affront to the Second Amendment. Defend the rights of the law abiding citizens of San Jose, California and uphold the Second Amendment. No tax of any kind for lawful ownership of a firearm to lawfully defend family, friends and neighbors from dangerous criminals.
Dan winter
Location: 95126, Sam Jose
Submitted At: 9:49pm 01-19-22
I’ve never been arrested. I don’t own a gun. I haven’t received a ticket in 35+ years. But I have voted in every election for 40 years and will vote in the next one. Punishing law-abiding citizens for the crimes and damage done by criminals is a shameful, misdirected abuse of power. The second amendment says we get to keep and bare arms. Don’t tax us for exercising our rights. Don’t waste our time.on feel good bad laws. Deal with criminals.
Grady guthrie
Location: 30641, Goodhope
Submitted At: 9:47pm 01-19-22
No good deal
Paul Buckholz
Location: 48422, Croswell
Submitted At: 9:44pm 01-19-22
Another reason not to vacation in CA
Jake Rogers
Location:
Submitted At: 9:44pm 01-19-22
This is ridiculous and purely an attempt to restrict the free exercise of the 2nd amendment.
George Snyder
Location: 99704, Clear
Submitted At: 9:43pm 01-19-22
Taxing a RIGHT is not constitutional. Do not pass this law, as it does not have anything to do with the law it's about control. What's next? Y ou plan on taxing free speech? As far as I'm concerned you are clearly trying to infringe on the constitutional rights of US citizens and should be removed from any and all public office's.
Kenny Brown
Location: 72616, Berryville
Submitted At: 9:41pm 01-19-22
We are taxed to much. One tax leds to another,they always tax everything I say no more taxes Todd Butikofer
Location: 83434, Menan
Submitted At: 9:41pm 01-19-22
I oppose this or any other attempt to limit and/or restrict gun ownership. As Gun ownership is guaranteed by the U. S. Constitution.
Barbara Bowman
Location: 79508, Buffalo Gap
Submitted At: 9:40pm 01-19-22
Do not pass this law, as it does not have anything to do with the law it's about control.
Jim Lang
Location: 95954, Magalia
Submitted At: 9:39pm 01-19-22
What's next? Y ou plan on taxing free speech? As far as I'm concerned you are clearly trying to infringe on the constitutional rights of US citizens and should be removed from any and all public office's.
Joseph Gibbs
Location: 31216, Macon
Submitted At: 9:38pm 01-19-22
Please STOP your illegal attempt to create a gun registry by imposing a tax to own a fire arm. This type of tax is unfair as it will not be enforced against ALL gun owning individuals in your jurisdiction. Criminals, felons & other illegal gun owners will not be taxed as they will not be known to tax collecting persons.
Richard Price
Location: 32605, Gainesville
Submitted At: 9:36pm 01-19-22
The left is pushing a revolt
Larry Schillinger
Location: 63366, OFallon
Submitted At: 9:34pm 01-19-22
Understand you will be voting Tuesday to pass a gun owners tax. This isn't just about San Jose - or even California.
There is a whole coalition of Bloomberg "Mayors Against Illegal Guns" in cities all across America just waiting to implement this blatantly unconstitutional attack on gun rights if it works in San Jose.
That's why our legal arm, the National Foundation for Gun Rights, is preparing to file a lawsuit to stop this anti- gun scheme in its tracks the instant the ordinance is passed! Rosalie Scott
Location: 66072, Parker
Submitted At: 9:34pm 01-19-22
I oppose this law because if approved it will become a cancer to the whole nation.
Terry Corman
Location: 80528, Fort Collins
Submitted At: 9:34pm 01-19-22
Please do not assault your citizens with this ordinance. It is never a good thing to violate the Constitution.. Taking away the right to self defense with this ordinance will prove to be slippery slope. Just because a few think this is a good idea does not make it so.
I urge you to reject this ordinance.
Mary Thompson
Location: 43215, Columbus
Submitted At: 9:34pm 01-19-22
This is I believe is illegal. A form of punishment put upon Gun Owners who have the right to keep & bare arms.
Instead of going after illegals who commit crimes with stolen or illegally purchased arms, your illegally targeting Legal Gund Owners & tracking them.
They have legally registered their Guns. They were taxed when they purchased their Guns. This is double taxation without representation.
Charles Phillips
Location: 37040, Clarksville
Submitted At: 9:31pm 01-19-22
All lawmakers need to go back and read a Bible and the Constitution. Y ou will learn more than you know now.
Y es, there are those that don't need to have guns. But what about the law -abiding citizens that want to have guns, for sports, hunting and for protection. Remember we elect the lawmakers. Y ou need our vote. This for all s States. Charles Phillips.
Ardden Beck
Location: 39530, Biloxi
Submitted At: 9:30pm 01-19-22
Unconstitutional
Jeffrey Harrington
Location: 59711, Anaconda
Submitted At: 9:27pm 01-19-22
If this ordinance passes,this illegal measure will be prosecuted in court to the full extent,until it is rescinded.It will be fought until it is nonstop!!!!!
Henry Wilson
Location: 47562, Odon
Submitted At: 9:26pm 01-19-22
Quit trying to impose backdoor registration via a gun tax on your citizens. Think it through. Don't be evil trying to bring about a subtle route for future gun confiscation. Don't do it.
Fliederbusch Summer
Location:
Submitted At: 9:26pm 01-19-22
Stop the Madness, law obiding citizens. are fed up with double and triple taxation, while true criminals run free, destroying our properties and life's with large vehicles, knifes, rocks and poison. Strongly oppose! Roy Davison
Location: 11209, Brooklyn
Submitted At: 9:23pm 01-19-22
This would not be attempted in any other time. Today the constitution and it's amendments are fair game for the bullying woke crowd. This is an outright grab and double jeopardy on our God given right to self protection. What about folks of low income that can not afford any other tax in these worrying and lawless times? How do they defend themselves, minorities, seniors, the disabled. They don't have bodyguards supplied by tax payer monies.
This is an end run around our constitution, period.
Gary Taylor
Location:
Submitted At: 9:23pm 01-19-22
This is just another backdoor attempt to move toward gun registration Joseph noll
Location: 89081-6526, North Las Vegas
Submitted At: 9:22pm 01-19-22
Do not pass a tax that creates infringement on the bill of rights. The measure is a bad ordinance.
C H
Location:
Submitted At: 9:20pm 01-19-22
Y our proposed resolution at trying to pass a gun tax is downright ridiculous. Not only is it a law abiding citizens constitutional right to own a firearm, but they have the right to exercise that 2nd amendment right tax free. Do you honestly think more laws will stop criminals from breaking laws with guns? I do not. Y our proposed tax is a downright travesty on legal gun owners and will do nothing to stop violent crime. People own guns to protect themselves. Prepare for lawsuits. They are coming.
George Forman
Location: 32701, Altermonte Springs
Submitted At: 9:20pm 01-19-22
No way
John Fraks
Location:
Submitted At: 9:19pm 01-19-22
For all the taxes we pay is sad, we the people are paying too much now for poor leadership and more government interference. No different than when Britain tried to control the colonies by taxing and intimidating, some familiar.
Leslie Brunett
Location: 96002, Redding
Submitted At: 9:18pm 01-19-22
We have already paid a tax on our guns when we bought them. Many people have guns locked away in a closet or somewhere safeand never use them. Why should we have to pay a tax on something never used? It is our constitutional right to have guns to protect ourselves in case something should happen when the law officers cannot do it. How do you justify a tax on protecting ourselves and our property? Stephen Morris
Location: 30012-1165, Conyers
Submitted At: 9:17pm 01-19-22
don't vote against the U.S. Constitution , seems oath of office is like campaign promises dessie velissaratos
Location: 94066, San Bruno
Submitted At: 9:17pm 01-19-22
Do not pass this law.. We have the second amendment covering all the law we need on this subject.Do not mess with the second amendment!
Terry Swithin
Location: 38464, Lawrenceburg
Submitted At: 9:16pm 01-19-22
Y ou charge Law abiding citizens a tax to avoid the real solution ? The solution you avoid ; Long term incarceration for felons with firearms and throw away the key for those who commit crimes with firearms. Be Smart . Act Smart .
Rolland NEWCOMB
Location: 49015-3235, BATTLE CREEK
Submitted At: 9:16pm 01-19-22
The Second Amendment PROTECTS U. S. of A. CITIZENS against gubbermint INFRINGEMENT of our "RIGHT to KEEP and BEAR ARMS"!! The gubbermint does NOT give us any right to bear arms! The Second Amendment limits ALL gubbermints (federal, state and local) from denying us or controlling a CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTED UNALIENABLE(sp) RIGHT!! We do NOT need your permission to "keep and bear arms" of ANY kind! PERIOD!! This is an UNCONSTITUTIONAL "LAW"!
David Horton
Location: 95127, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:13pm 01-19-22
what is wrong with you people?
Duane Armitage
Location: 54956, Neenah
Submitted At: 9:13pm 01-19-22
Do not attempt to pass your illegal back door gun registration.
Glenn Young
Location: 21228, CATONSVILLE
Submitted At: 9:12pm 01-19-22
The 2nd Amendment clearly forbids shenanigans like your "tax" method of registering guns. I am not a gun owner and
am not a citizen of California' but I do oppose attacks on our Constitution.
Zackary Walter
Location: 84070, Sandy
Submitted At: 9:10pm 01-19-22
Do not pass
Joe Hayes
Location: 31909, Columbus
Submitted At: 9:08pm 01-19-22
The 2nd amendment lets everyone keep and bear arms. U cannot rewrite the constitution without a vote.
Anony Mous
Location:
Submitted At: 9:07pm 01-19-22
Are we also going to introduce an air tax to reduce murders by strangulation? Tressa Schutter
Location: 59901, Kalispell
Submitted At: 9:05pm 01-19-22
I oppose the Agenda Item 4.1 22-045 Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance. Bad people do not care what the law says. They do not care about your laws. Keep making them, bad people will keep braking them! John Rhoderick
Location: 97080, Gresham
Submitted At: 9:05pm 01-19-22
No tax on guns
Eric Pike
Location: 10004, New Y ork
Submitted At: 9:02pm 01-19-22
I want you to stop this bill from going through. Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance Is just a back door to creating an illegal gun registry. The second amendment gives us the right to bear arms leave it alone.? _ J B
Location: 86325
Submitted At: 8:59pm 01-19-22
Sad to say, this is another cash cow grab, and infringement on the 2nd amendment. This will in no way reduce the crime problem, but will only punish law abiding citizens, while criminal element flourishes. Gun registration would be next, I therefore strongly oppose the ordinance, and as you will see, millions of gun owners will do the same.
Bad example for any city to consider.
Georgia Sosenko
Location: 13126, Oswego
Submitted At: 8:59pm 01-19-22
I oppose this or any law that interfere with our 2nd amendment rights or make it harder for anyone to buy or own.
Paul D'Ascenz
Location: 80020, Broomfield
Submitted At: 8:59pm 01-19-22
This is UNCONSTITUTIONAL!
James Kleeburg
Location:
Submitted At: 8:59pm 01-19-22
This is wrong and you know it. Taxation is an infringement and also conveniently creates a registry. Stop the madness. Wake up, we have.
Terry Brenneman
Location: 85541, Payson
Submitted At: 8:58pm 01-19-22
The second amendment is a right, not a privilege. Government coffers should not be filled should I or any other law abiding citizen choose to exercise that right.
Nancy Mcjunkin
Location: 77388, Spring
Submitted At: 8:55pm 01-19-22
I'm sure you noticed I am not a California resident. However, what your city is proposing to enact will eventually affect the entire country. It goes against our constitutional rights of gun ownership.
I sincerely hope that you reconsider implementing this ordinance.
M Johnson
Location: 95192, San jose
Submitted At: 8:55pm 01-19-22
I OPPOSE Agenda Item 4.1 22-045 Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance. Gun control is a state level issue. Taxing a constitutional right is illegal. No new gun control. Stop feeding NRA lawsuits.
M Johnson
Location: 95192, San jose
Submitted At: 8:55pm 01-19-22
I OPPOSE Agenda Item 4.1 22-045 Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance. Gun control is a state level issue. Taxing a constitutional right is illegal. No new gun control. Stop feeding NRA lawsuits.
Gary Cullum
Location: 72143, Searcy
Submitted At: 8:54pm 01-19-22
We bought and paid for our guns and paid the taxes on them registered them. Please stop it will gain nothing.
Our rights shall not be infringed.
Paul Marchetti
Location: 12401-2320, KINGSTON
Submitted At: 8:53pm 01-19-22
This is unconstitutional and will do nothing to reduce gun violence.
Don't you people have any other problems requiring your attention? Shelia McMullen
Location: 76049, Granbury
Submitted At: 8:52pm 01-19-22
Stop trying to tax our guns
William Lancaster
Location: 79124-1229, Amarillo
Submitted At: 8:51pm 01-19-22
A gun tax is very un-American!
Fran Scott
Location: 95065, Santa Cruz
Submitted At: 8:51pm 01-19-22
Please allow us to keep this right.
Jerry Evans
Location: 60046, Lake Villa
Submitted At: 8:50pm 01-19-22
I oppose this attempt to infringe on the rights of legal gun owners with a tax on a right! Are you also considering a poll tax?
HD Sumner
Location: 96064, Montague
Submitted At: 8:49pm 01-19-22
no gun ownership tax. This is not constitutional
Daniel Flowers
Location: 75161, Terrell
Submitted At: 8:49pm 01-19-22
Y ou people are totally disconnected from reality and most importantly your creator, Almighty God.
Stop pursuing wicked actions and leave God's people alone. There will come a day when ALL will bow and declare Jesus Christ is King.
Som Mathur
Location: 92505, Riverside
Submitted At: 8:48pm 01-19-22
Unethical, unconstitutional, and dangerous, especially to minorities. percy jenkins
Location: 77573
Submitted At: 8:47pm 01-19-22
no gun ownership tax. This is not constitutional . I oppose this.
Larry Price
Location: 75645, Gilmer
Submitted At: 8:47pm 01-19-22
It would be nice if you people in governing bodies would look at things realistically. This is America, not some third world communist run country. Things continue to get worse for everyone, and people need to be able to defend them selves from the evil. The devil is hard at work now more than ever trying to destroy our beautiful country. Please do the right thing and don't pass bills that hinder the good people.
Leland Finley
Location: 64150, Riverside
Submitted At: 8:46pm 01-19-22
If you must insist on passing a "gun tax" then institute it when the gun is purchased. DO NOT think for one- minute law-abiding citizens will want to pay this/
Harold Owens
Location: 35768, Scottsboro
Submitted At: 8:46pm 01-19-22
Dear sir/Mam, I do'nt live in your jurisdiction but, the so-called tax that you are thinking of passing would be a lose-lose for everybody.
Alexander Ur
Location: 93436, Lompoc
Submitted At: 8:45pm 01-19-22
This yet another attempt to infringe on our 2nd ammendment. We are nation built on guns . WWII was a great point as to why Japan did not invade the U.S.A . The Emperor of Japan despite his generals saying to invade. He denied their suggestions due to the fact that we are an armed nation . The weak excuses that gun grabbers try to impose just do not make a single solitary reason for their nonsensical ideas . How can anyone actually believe that a CRIMINAL will purchase a gun from a legal FFL ?
Steven Croft
Location: 83221, Blackfoot
Submitted At: 8:45pm 01-19-22
Stupid is as stupid does! Y ou idiots pass this and you can prepare to move you won’t be able to protect yourself’s anymore let alone your children. Because killers and
Murder’s don’t pay taxes or register guns and if you think they do, go ahead and stand with them. After that it’s all natural selection…….
Ernie Moffet
Location: 98642, Ridgefield
Submitted At: 8:44pm 01-19-22
There is no justification for this.
Enforce existing laws while maintaining adherence to individual rights Lance Sholes
Location: 97045, Oregon City
Submitted At: 8:44pm 01-19-22
Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance? Why don't you call it what it really is?? Tax law abiding citizens in an attempt to take away more of their 2nd amendment rights. We the People will not stand for this. EVER!! Stop this.
Sharon Dunham
Location: 76708, Waco
Submitted At: 8:44pm 01-19-22
I am opposed to a gun tax.
Larry Whiteside
Location: 40214, Louisville
Submitted At: 8:43pm 01-19-22
All of you have body guards who have firearms. We have the right to bear arms. Leave it alone.
James White
Location: 46135, Greencastle
Submitted At: 8:41pm 01-19-22
The Second Amendment is very CLEAR! SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED! Pramod Bhooma
Location:
Submitted At: 8:41pm 01-19-22
Whole of Bill of Rights is present to safeguard us ALL from Tyranny from Within and Without of our beloved Republic.
Wisdom of Founding Fathers stood the test of time of 200 plus years proving that to be true beyond doubt when other nations citizens whose self-defense rights were curtailed got submerged into horrors of Communism and Fascism losing life, liberty and property to evil.
I request your office to make dismantle this proposed UNCONSTITUTIONAL Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance Michael Boggie
Location: 85310-3463, Glendale
Submitted At: 8:41pm 01-19-22
Sad that you can't wrap your brain cell around the concept, intellection, precepts of the Constitution. So myopic, egocentric, narcissistic, controlling. No level of intrusion into other free, equal citizens lives ever satiates your craven desire. Y ou justify your power position by controlling, self-seving machinations, manipulation, undermining foundational basics beyond your authority. Clearly, self righteous people do not make this Country great. Are you a Marxist? MAGA, 2A, Let's GO Brandon!
Monica Gary
Location: 70607, Lake Charles
Submitted At: 8:40pm 01-19-22
No anti gun legislation!
Allen Snively
Location: 74451, Park Hill
Submitted At: 8:40pm 01-19-22
Don't be stupid... leave the 2nd Amendment alone.
Steven Stewart
Location: 98922, CleElum
Submitted At: 8:38pm 01-19-22
I oppose this and any anti constitutional garbage anywhere.
Ben Reinquist
Location: 95116-2370, San Jose
Submitted At: 8:38pm 01-19-22
Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance
If you so strongly oppose the individual freedoms upon which our country was founded, perhaps you should move to a place that more closely aligns with your ideology. I'd suggest North Korea.
Patricia Snider
Location: 31308, Ellabell
Submitted At: 8:38pm 01-19-22
If passed, this will be the first hard sep to stripping away the rights of legal gun owners, as criminals DO NOT tell anyone they have a gun/guns. The German people had theirs taken and thus Hitler was free to become the horrendous leader that almost conquered the world. Americans do NOT NEED to be brought to their knees with only the criminal element being able to hold any citizen hostage. Fearfully so American could take great offense and incite a civil ,rebellion
S K
Location:
Submitted At: 8:38pm 01-19-22
Leave our guns and our gun rights alone! We are already fighting hard enough for our gun rights. Leave it alone!! Stephanie DeMott
Location: 19363, Oxford
Submitted At: 8:37pm 01-19-22
Stop trying to override our constitutional rights. We need to protect ourselves if you’re going to take all the police away. There’s already been a rise in violent crime because of you, and now you don’t even want us to be able to protect ourselves and our families from these criminals? No tax, No way! John Bryant
Location: 27810, Belhaven
Submitted At: 8:37pm 01-19-22
Why would you do this? Honest Americans not committing crimes...its the black street gangs high on heroin with a stolen gun causing all this crime...Plus you let these black thigs walk in a store steal $900 of property and your law prevents arrest!!! Let the police go back to being hard on criminals and bring back swift punishment and public hangings.
US Military retired
Leslie Fish
Location: 85326, Buckeye
Submitted At: 8:36pm 01-19-22
This proposed law is blatantly unconstitutional, and will be struck down in court, but only after legal battles have eaten up far more of our tax-money than the proposed gun tax will have brought in. It's a waste of time and money, and will bring the town only embarrassment.
Judi Chain
Location: 95046, San martin
Submitted At: 8:36pm 01-19-22
Oppose
Lee House
Location: 94803, El Sobrante
Submitted At: 8:36pm 01-19-22
Why are you supporting communist socialist rule
Michael Grivette
Location: 94551, Livermore
Submitted At: 8:33pm 01-19-22
So what other elements of the Bill of Rights are you going to tax? Remember that the United States Constitution does not give us rights. It prevents you characters from interfering with the ones we already have. Y ou want to see real civil disobedience? Keep doing what you are doing. Next come the pitchforks and torches.
Michael Thompson
Location: 93041, Port Hueneme
Submitted At: 8:33pm 01-19-22
No Frickin wsy
Mauro Herrera
Location: 92220, Beaumont
Submitted At: 8:32pm 01-19-22
No more taxes!! California is already one of the highest paying in the us. This tax is unconstitutional and will have extremely hard on the tax paying citizens. No wonder everyone is moving out of commifornia!! Cy Young
Location: 85648, Rio rico
Submitted At: 8:29pm 01-19-22
Don't pass your stupid gun tax or you will be criminals! Charles Walters
Location: 34689, Tarpon Springs
Submitted At: 8:27pm 01-19-22
Registries first; confiscations next. Stop trying to erode our constitutional rights! Do you really want to live under tyranny? WE THE PEOPLE choose to remain FREE!
Glen York
Location: 62859, McLeansboro
Submitted At: 8:26pm 01-19-22
look at the nation gun purchase and if you have anything between your ears you should see that they don't want anyone messing with the 2 nd amendmentor there guns
Anthony Ladd
Location: 95020, Gilroy
Submitted At: 8:25pm 01-19-22
Dear Council Members:
Fortunately I do not live in San Jose. The only people affected by this tax are the law abiding. The criminals could care less about your slly laws. Taxes like this along with all the regulations the Democrats impose on businesses are driving the exodus from the state so the only ones left will be the criminals and homeless.
Gary Peard
Location: 89509, Reno
Submitted At: 8:24pm 01-19-22
No Tax No Fees on people’s rights
John Zacharias
Location: 77375, Tomball
Submitted At: 8:24pm 01-19-22
Criminals are not obligated to tell you they have a gun (5th Amendment), tax will not stop them.
Bruce Zachmann
Location: 48114, Brighton
Submitted At: 8:24pm 01-19-22
The only one this harms is the law abiding citizens who legally own firearms. Criminals have their firearms illegally and pray on the innocent. Y ou people who pass these unconstitutional laws are a bunch of Anti American pieces of garbage IMHO. Go move to a Commie Country.
Robert Shanks
Location: 86305, Prescott
Submitted At: 8:24pm 01-19-22
This is counter to our second amendment...vote NO!
Richard Escareno
Location: 92844, Garden Grove
Submitted At: 8:23pm 01-19-22
Stop infringing on our right to self defense. No anti gun laws period. The discussion is over & has been decided long ago by our founding father's. Stop the madness!
Alan Robinson
Location: 89121, Las Vegas
Submitted At: 8:22pm 01-19-22
This has already been ruled against. To bring it up again is to violate "double jeopardy".
Dwayne Massengill
Location: 37871, Strawberry Plains
Submitted At: 8:21pm 01-19-22
This is B.S. Communism is on our doorstep.
Steven Burns
Location: 38801, Tupelo
Submitted At: 8:19pm 01-19-22
What part of “Shall not be infringed” is it you’re incapable of understanding? Perhaps when you are voted out of office and unemployed you will have time to contemplate it.
Dwight Crane
Location: 77357, New Caney, Texas
Submitted At: 8:19pm 01-19-22
Stop trying to destroy our second amendment, you have no right to tax or confiscate our guns.
GET OUT/ Move to Russa or some other communist counties. Vote No on the law ! Dennis Pulse
Location: 52803, Davenport
Submitted At: 8:18pm 01-19-22
No one should have pay a tax for a right. The 2nd amendment and the SCOTUS have protected this right.
Arissa Marquard
Location: 58703, Minot
Submitted At: 8:18pm 01-19-22
I am against anything that is going to discourage in any way, shape or form anything that is going to discourage any law abiding, legal citizen or anyone who is legally holding a green card & not a illegal alien that wants to legally own a firearm.
william carlson
Location: 95120, San Jose
Submitted At: 8:18pm 01-19-22
This ordinance is a terrible idea, making homeowners pay for gang violence. The criminals will not care about the ordinance, they never do, but residents will be punished for criminal actions of others. Better to increase the police force, not defund them. San Jose police is drastically understaffed to help stem the rapid increase in crime of all sorts. Stop punishing the citizens and go after the bad guys.
Jeffrey Patrick
Location: 67561, Nickerson
Submitted At: 8:18pm 01-19-22
This attempt to punish legal gun owners will not effect illegal weapons nor will it be accepted by taxpayers who are aware of encroachments on the freedoms this country was founded to protect.
Shame on you
Cynthia Glennie
Location: 75248, Dallas
Submitted At: 8:17pm 01-19-22
I can’t believe these people in California believe they can go against the constitution and win Y ou will fail. All Americans will oppose you
William Kovacs
Location: 90505, Torrance
Submitted At: 8:16pm 01-19-22
If you want to do something right, pressure Newsom to enforce capital punishment and clear out his 700 plus member killer's retirement home (death row) to give the killers what they fear most! Our tax dollars should not be wasted on your plan nor Newsoms!!
James Catt
Location: 38858, Nettleton
Submitted At: 8:16pm 01-19-22
Sir's ,
The proposed bill that you are planning to vote on is both unlawful and unconstitutional.
Patricia Barrick
Location: 89014, Henderson
Submitted At: 8:16pm 01-19-22
If this crazy law is passed your constituents will be spending a bunch of their tax money in court and end up losing.
Ken Tranter
Location: 15089, West Newton
Submitted At: 8:15pm 01-19-22
Ok, woke generation idiots, if you remove weapons from the citizens you are not the only enemy, there are other Countries just salivating to come here and take over. If you tax the citizenry you will have woke a sleeping giant and you won't like our attitude afterwards!!
Jay Keller
Location: 93703, Fresno
Submitted At: 8:14pm 01-19-22
Taxing a right is illegal, per the constitution. Y ou also do not have a right ro make a database of all owners.
MIKE THIRY
Location: 99362, Walla Walla
Submitted At: 8:14pm 01-19-22
How about empowering legal gun owners instead of punishing us for using our inalienable rights. This tax will do nothing but cause more crime since none of us will comply. Enough is enough of you attacking our RIGHTS.
Dala Blank
Location: 51501, Council Bluffs
Submitted At: 8:14pm 01-19-22
Please do not pass this ordinance. I am against it.
Rick Mckee
Location: 75647, Gladewater
Submitted At: 8:14pm 01-19-22
We don’t need any back door gun registration schemes!
Debi Miley
Location: 74019, Claremore
Submitted At: 8:14pm 01-19-22
Please do NOT pass any tax regarding the U.S. Constitution 2nd Amendment. Gun Ownership is our right under the law. It should not be taxed.
Leroy Garman
Location: 61546, Manito
Submitted At: 8:13pm 01-19-22
This should be thrown out as unconstitutional, as it in violation of 2nd amendment of the US Constitution Brian Blankenmyer
Location: 17603, Lancaster
Submitted At: 8:13pm 01-19-22
It's unconstitutional to tax a right.
Here's a radical idea, prosecute and incarcerate law breakers.
David Brockway
Location: 38555, Crossville
Submitted At: 8:12pm 01-19-22
how about registering all the criminals by putting them in jail! High bail for felonies or no bail at all.
Gary Colbeth
Location: 06067, Rocky Hill
Submitted At: 8:12pm 01-19-22
I oppose the gun tax!
James Brown
Location: 78154, Selma
Submitted At: 8:12pm 01-19-22
It is already a Constitutional Freedom and should not ever be taxed.
Vivian Power
Location: 16428, North East
Submitted At: 8:12pm 01-19-22
Our Government has no business taxing us period because of the wasteful spending. Our guns are off limits.
Why? Because the wasteful spending of trillions of tax payer’s money is ridiculous and we are appalled and livid over what this administration is doing to force America into debt! Enough! Mike Buckley
Location: 93536, Lancaster
Submitted At: 8:11pm 01-19-22
It's the first step to the government monitoring and ultimately controlling your 2nd amendment rights.
Kennith Milroy
Location: 84070, Sandy
Submitted At: 8:10pm 01-19-22
Don't tread on the 2nd amendment
John Hughes
Location: 76310, Wichita Falls
Submitted At: 8:10pm 01-19-22
Quit acting like the commies you obviously are. I left California in 1982. The smartest thing I've ever done.
Lionel Keros
Location: 85142, Queen Creek
Submitted At: 8:10pm 01-19-22
Taxes are for services provided by the government. Here the only crime that the tax would pay for, would be the crime of not paying the tax. It's creating a crime that doesn't need to exist and is terrorism against the people.
Please do not vote for this terrorist law.
Justin Orick
Location: 72002, Alexander
Submitted At: 8:09pm 01-19-22
This is blatantly unconstitutional and an obvious jab to disarm law abiding Americans from being able to protect themselves from a runaway, overreaching, tyrannical government.
Cecilia Rowell
Location: 14059, Elma
Submitted At: 8:08pm 01-19-22
Against the Constitution of the United States the right to bear arms!!!!!! Philip Pogue
Location: 70123, Harahan
Submitted At: 8:08pm 01-19-22
This is a phony prop. just to register your gun, you outta worry and do more about illegals coming in, and releasing violent criminals and finish building the Wall, then you would really be doing something that's destroying America!
Robin Serna
Location: 95667, Placerville
Submitted At: 8:07pm 01-19-22
This is a blatant attack on our Constitutional 2nd Amendment Rights. This MUST be voted down Joseph Scott
Location: 43224-2639, Columbus
Submitted At: 8:07pm 01-19-22
We already paid tax on firearms when we bought them.
This is just another attempt to destroy the 2nd amendment Phillip Gooch
Location: 38642, Lamar
Submitted At: 8:07pm 01-19-22
What is it you people do not understand about our 2nd amendment, that was never intended to be taxed! We the people will not stand for this tax you are planning!
Robert Buntin
Location: 53215, Milwaukee
Submitted At: 8:05pm 01-19-22
This is unconstitutional and and infringement of the rights of the American people! This bill needs to be thrown in the trash can where it belongs!!
Donna Blanton
Location: 60477, Tinley Park
Submitted At: 8:04pm 01-19-22
This is wrong, and I don’t support this. Illinois has some of the toughest gun laws. Did you see the News lately? It doesn’t work. Criminals don’t follow the rules.
Michael McCrite
Location: 85541, Payson
Submitted At: 8:03pm 01-19-22
Please do not pass the Gun Tax ownership Bill. It's the Constitutional right for every American to Legally own a Firearm, in the state of CA, and all the other states of this Nation.
This is a tax on self-defense. Self-defense is a right that shall not be infringed, especially when so many violent criminals are being released without concern for the consequences to law abiding citizens. Criminals will not pay the tax.
Thank Y ou
Renee Szabo
Location: 44070, North Olmsted
Submitted At: 8:03pm 01-19-22
This is just a backdoor attempt at creating an illegal gun registry! Do not pass this proposed ordinance!
JAMES Dooley
Location: 45030, Harrison
Submitted At: 8:00pm 01-19-22
Do not pass this bill it will do nothing but harm gun owners David Wood
Location:
Submitted At: 8:00pm 01-19-22
This is nothing more then a back door attempt at a gun owner registry and is unconstitutional. In order to actually fight crime lets stop pushing more regulations on the law abiding citizens and work on fixing families. We have so many clinical studies showing that young adults are 85% less likely to commit crimes if they come from a home with a Mom and Dad. Lets put the family back together and there will be less crimes period.
Gary Horne
Location: 71463, Oakdale
Submitted At: 7:59pm 01-19-22
Oppose this proposed law
David Fife
Location: 43011, Centerburg
Submitted At: 7:54pm 01-19-22
Why don't you and your police department do your job and keep the guns out of criminals hands. This is the main reason for violence - not the law abiding citizens. Are you also going to impose a tax on all knives owned by housewives? How about a tax on chainsaws? Any criminal with bad intentions could get hold of one of these and cause a lot of deaths and injuries! Just stop trying to circumvent the constitutional 2nd amendment rights of ALL citizens of the United States!!!!!!!!!
Keith Harper
Location: 23462, Virginia Beach
Submitted At: 7:53pm 01-19-22
This is a back door effort to gun registration registry and should not be done!
BARB FISHER
Location: 54114, Crivitz
Submitted At: 7:53pm 01-19-22
Please do not pass the Gun Tax ownership Bill. It is one more trend to take away our Constitutional rights which we have as citizens. Remember that criminals will ALWAYS be able to get guns. Stop infringing on our rights.
Joseph Larsen
Location: 85086, Phoenix
Submitted At: 7:52pm 01-19-22
I'm not in California but since yall are letting illegals vote I figured this counts too.
Lawrence Scrivner
Location: 29673, PIEDMONT
Submitted At: 7:50pm 01-19-22
Guns are not the problem it's people like you who want to pass tax laws And put other restrictions on law abiding gun owners. Why Don't you enforce the laws already on the books. I guess it's easier just to make new laws and not worry about the old laws. It's all about control of the people.
Stephen Schroeder
Location: 32829-8829, Orlando
Submitted At: 7:49pm 01-19-22
What will be tried there, may be tried elsewhere, and it is wrong, and unconstitutional.
Robert Flathmann
Location: 33414, Wellington
Submitted At: 7:48pm 01-19-22
Why is it that you won’t punish criminals but want to deny legal firearms owners their constitutional rights without tax penalties. Do your job and support the constitution of the United States without your personal interpretation.
Y ou are wrong!
Duane hearn
Location: 24311, Atkins
Submitted At: 7:47pm 01-19-22
Please don't pass that's all we need is more taxes
Dean Capa
Location: 12740, Sundown
Submitted At: 7:47pm 01-19-22
Stop infringe on our 2nd amendment right.
Nick Gustafson
Location: 65768, Vanzant
Submitted At: 7:46pm 01-19-22
Please do not pass this bill.
Lynn Miller
Location: 96097, Yreka
Submitted At: 7:45pm 01-19-22
Please do not pass the Gun Tax ownership Bill. It's the Constitutional right for every American to Legally own a Firearm, in the state of ca, and all the other states of this Nation.
Thank Y ou Lynn Miller
Jim Cox
Location: 45150, Milford
Submitted At: 7:45pm 01-19-22
If you persist in going directly against the Constitution, we will reserve the right to forcibly remove you from office.
Y ou have proven time and time again, you cannot be trusted to do what we ask, spend our money wisely, nor follow the Constitution.
Russ B
Location: 45458-2927, Centerville
Submitted At: 7:45pm 01-19-22
Guns are not the problem. Politicians who want to control us are. If they would enforce the laws as they are we would not have the problems we now have.
Matthew Heim
Location: 93003, Ventura
Submitted At: 7:43pm 01-19-22
Additional taxation to reduce firearm purchases might reduce the number of legal gun firearm sales, but it will do nothing to reduce the illegal firearm sales by which criminals obtain firearms. Check the crime statistics for UT and compare this with CA. Y ou will see that the per capita aggravated assault and armed robbery crime rates are significantly lower in an area where the general public is armed. Reducing legal firearm ownership will not reduce the crime rates, but likely increase it.
JOSEPH ARENA
Location: 14435, CONESUS
Submitted At: 7:37pm 01-19-22
DO not pass this new tax law it will do nothing to make the streets in your city safer or keep illegal guns off the street, it will only make honest people suffer. What would the money be used for ? , perhaps help fund the drug habits of the homeless bums on your streets that want rest of society to pay for the bad decisions they made in their life's !.
Kenneth Johnston
Location: 32162-1616, The Villages
Submitted At: 7:37pm 01-19-22
Guns not problem! People is problem!
James Balz
Location: 11757, LINDENHURST
Submitted At: 7:37pm 01-19-22
Do you actually believe the "bad guys" will pay a tax on illegal guns that they have? Maybe they will pay with stolen money or just sell more drugs.
Jack Potter
Location: 80022, Commerce City
Submitted At: 7:37pm 01-19-22
This certainly is not the time to pass any laws or create restrictions on gun ownership .Read the headlines. It is evident to me that law abiding citizens should be able to own guns for their own protection, without restriction.
Kerry Baum
Location:
Submitted At: 7:36pm 01-19-22
Congress (and after the 14th amendment it applies to any government agency) shall make no law abridging the right to bear arms. Y our proposal to tax weapons is just a backdoor attempt to create a gun registry and I will not comply with illegal decrees.
Sharon Tuten
Location: 29809, New ellentin
Submitted At: 7:36pm 01-19-22
GROW UP ...you all know this is unconstitutional and will loose in court, do you have nothing else to do in your miserable lives where you think you are all that and have the right to discriminate because your paid handlers tell you what to do? Remember, the devil always collects what he is owed to him, you sleep with dogs, you get fleas.
David McGinness
Location: 67062, Hesston
Submitted At: 7:36pm 01-19-22
The constitution gives us the right to bare arms for personal protection. Y ou will be going against the Constitution of the United States of America.
Deborah Perkins
Location: 92626, costa mesa
Submitted At: 7:35pm 01-19-22
I oppose this tax
Albert Rodriguez
Location: 27587, Wake forest
Submitted At: 7:35pm 01-19-22
This is directly against the constitution please reconsider Michael Duncan
Location: 30096, Duluth
Submitted At: 7:34pm 01-19-22
Please respect the right of Americans to private ownership of firearms. The government shouldn't tax our right out of existence.
Jose Rodriguez
Location: 46808, Fort Wayne
Submitted At: 7:34pm 01-19-22
It’s are right and its being targeted to many time and the second amendment states are in peace compare to those with out 2 amendment.0j0….
Wayne Adiego
Location: 95688, Vacaville
Submitted At: 7:33pm 01-19-22
Bad idea
Jim Ijames
Location: 75092, Sherman
Submitted At: 7:33pm 01-19-22
The second amendment is not to be infringed upon!.
Michael Bociaga
Location: 91387, Santa Clarita
Submitted At: 7:32pm 01-19-22
Perhaps if you prosecuted actual criminals instead of demeaning law abiding citizens, you would achieve 'harm reduction'. This tax is a smokescreen for deeper mismanagement.
Minority Veteran
Location: 12345, Chicago
Submitted At: 7:32pm 01-19-22
Gun Control Laws come from a place/person of privilege, are racist and don't work! Howard Simmons
Location: 44055, Lorain
Submitted At: 7:30pm 01-19-22
No anti2A laws!!!
Patrick Malmstrom
Location: 97302, Salem,
Submitted At: 7:30pm 01-19-22
Y ou want to pass a gunn tax? Y ou can’t even balance your own city budget! Look at how many people and businesses have left your city! Let alone your county!
Michael Rodgers
Location: 95139, San Jose
Submitted At: 7:29pm 01-19-22
We pay to much taxes now, and it's unconstitutional to rip off law abiding citizens with this tax, don't pass this tax.
BIll Evans
Location: 74834, Chandler
Submitted At: 7:29pm 01-19-22
Take your hands off my second amendment right! Quit playing with them.
Arthur Trevallee
Location: 57103, Sioux Falls
Submitted At: 7:28pm 01-19-22
Y ou cannot tax a Constitutional Right.
Stephen Crawford
Location: 95124, San Jose
Submitted At: 7:27pm 01-19-22
Just another attempt to punish legal gun owners that will have no effect on crime Richard Craine
Location: 80013, Aurora
Submitted At: 7:26pm 01-19-22
How do you propose to tax illegal gun owners like felons or gang members John Williams
Location: 14891, Watkins Glen
Submitted At: 7:24pm 01-19-22
Hitler is in your house
Kevin Wright
Location: 92677, Laguna Niguel
Submitted At: 7:23pm 01-19-22
This is nothing more than more communistic overreach to track guns. As the CEO of my company, I sub-contract companies that are based in San Jose. If this passes I will terminate those contracts with your local businesses and they will suffer great financial loss as a result of your actions. In the millions. I will also let them know you are responsible for it. That’s how serious I am about protecting guns rights.
Wanda Carroway
Location: 71044, Ida
Submitted At: 7:23pm 01-19-22
DO NOT PASS THIS
J T
Location:
Submitted At: 7:19pm 01-19-22
This unfortunate blatant attack on law abiding gun owners will do nothing to stop the crimes perpetrated by criminals in San Jose or any where else in America. Criminals do not care about nor do they abide by your laws.
However, law abiding gun owners, the exact same people who do care and follow your laws, who can and do vote, will be harmed. The sad fact is that you know this and do not care. Y ou are only forcing this unconstitutional raping of law abiding citizens rights for your own agenda.
Mike Hendricks
Location: 97103, Astoria
Submitted At: 7:19pm 01-19-22
STOP!!!
Donald Lee
Location: 23434, Sufolk
Submitted At: 7:18pm 01-19-22
Typical jackass liberal, throwing a tax out towards law abiding citizens who have never been part of the problem.
Y our policies are as ineffective as those of your senile fool president joe biden..
Small caps used on purpose to show appropriate disrespect.
Carl Bishop
Location:
Submitted At: 7:18pm 01-19-22
Absolutely Oppose this attempt to gather data to develop a gun owner registry and it is ridiculous that a TAX would be attempted on a Constitutional Right. So why don't you develop a TAX on Knife ownership and Exercising your rights to Free Speech ? This is wrong and clearly an anti-gun/gun control zealot approach. Will not stand in Court.
Santiago Medina
Location: 87747, Springer
Submitted At: 7:18pm 01-19-22
don't
ROBERT ZUPANEK
Location: 28562-8017, NEW BERN
Submitted At: 7:17pm 01-19-22
Gun ownership is a constitutional right that no city should interfere. Find some other legitimate way to raise taxes without crossing into federal constitutional law
Richard Probert
Location: 91602, Los Angeles
Submitted At: 7:17pm 01-19-22
This proposed tax would make it more expensive to own firearms, and thus would disproportionately affect the poor, people of color and women.
Its passage would bring lawsuits and the taxpayer's money would be wasted defending an indefensible law. david huffman
Location: 71360, PINEVILLE
Submitted At: 7:16pm 01-19-22
California is the state of mind. but I think maybe you have finally lost it. shame you cant tax unwise politicians.
Concerned Voter
Location:
Submitted At: 7:15pm 01-19-22
California is one of the 50 States that make up the United States of America. The 2nd Amendment is fully law in the USA. This plan to pass a gun ownership tax next Tuesday is really just a backdoor attempt at creating an illegal gun registry. This is not just about San Jose or even California. There is a whole coalition of Bloomberg "Mayors Against Illegal Guns" in cities all across America just waiting to implement this blatantly unconstitutional attack on gun rights if it works in San Jose.
Michael Parks
Location:
Submitted At: 7:14pm 01-19-22
This is in direct violation of the 2nd Amendment and is something you should be ashamed of.
Milford Palmer
Location: 12883, Ticonderoga
Submitted At: 7:14pm 01-19-22
Democrats keep letting the bad guys out of Jail and now the Democrats do not want to put bad guys in jail to start with . These guys do not care about gun laws. Y ou will not stop crime with gun laws.
George Walker
Location: 43950, St Clairsville
Submitted At: 7:14pm 01-19-22
Why don't you enforce the laws on the books? Than make one that is nothing but a double tax against good law- abiding citizens. Are you double taxing your cars once they are in your driveway? Y our houses? Y our TV sets? Allison Zigadlo
Location: 06278, Ashford
Submitted At: 7:13pm 01-19-22
I oppose this gun tax.we need guns now more than ever for our own protection because of all the crime.
Louis xxxxxx
Location: 66666, take a hike
Submitted At: 7:13pm 01-19-22
_, nuff said!
Doug Baker
Location: 97322, Albany
Submitted At: 7:13pm 01-19-22
Leave our guns alone !!
Rosemary Southwood
Location: 97202, Portland
Submitted At: 7:12pm 01-19-22
Another attack on our constitutional 2A freedoms. Blatant and unapologetic. Please do the right thing and oppose this measure and instead focus on the rampant gun crime currently occurring in Democrat run cities by ILLEGAL gun owners.
Robert Engel
Location: 54154, Oconto Falls
Submitted At: 7:12pm 01-19-22
A back door way to register guns and first step in gun confiscation.
Blake Spencer
Location: 74048, Nowata
Submitted At: 7:11pm 01-19-22
All arms legislation is unconstitutional, Shall Not Be Infringed. FAAFO! Shawn Davlin
Location: 75243, Dallas
Submitted At: 7:11pm 01-19-22
Really? REALL Y? Is it Kristallnacht all over again? Backdooring a sneak attack to undermine our constitution? As usual, you clowns have no shame or respect for the rule of law.
Destin Landa
Location:
Submitted At: 7:11pm 01-19-22
I thought NY was bad with unconstitutional gun laws but yet here you are trying to tax someone’s rights. Y ou’re clearly not in touch with reality or you’re greedy and think you can violate someone’s natural rights. If I lived in Commiefornia, I still wouldn’t comply with this bullsh*t. Remember what our founders did over a 3% tax on tea.
S J
Location:
Submitted At: 7:09pm 01-19-22
Slippery slope, my friends. It may be you who might need to defend yourself one day, so increasing the chances of gun limitations further heightens chances of losing your right to defend yourselves.
Reve Keller
Location: 55011, Cedar
Submitted At: 7:08pm 01-19-22
Gun laws don't stop criminals from obtaining them.
Tom Anderson
Location:
Submitted At: 7:08pm 01-19-22
who do you think you are even proposing something like this!? Alan McLain
Location: 97408, Eugene
Submitted At: 7:07pm 01-19-22
Quit trying to erode our constitutional rights. Y ou are no smarter than our founding fathers.
Jeremy Jones
Location: 36271, Ohatchee
Submitted At: 7:04pm 01-19-22
I think this is a bad policy. And will erode the freedoms of Americans.
Brian Hughes
Location: 95961, Plumas Lake
Submitted At: 7:02pm 01-19-22
This legislation is unconstitutional and absurd. I’m a California resident who very strongly opposes this.
Jeremiah Rivera
Location: 37073, Greenbrier
Submitted At: 7:02pm 01-19-22
Criminals don’t care about gun laws. If that was the case, drugs would be off the streets. Those are regulated and yet here we are still waging a war on drug crime….how can disarming law abiding citizens protect anyone?!?! Robert Floyd
Location: 17516, CONESTOGA
Submitted At: 7:00pm 01-19-22
Please do not punish law abiding citizens with this tax while criminals are freed and encouraged to continue breaking laws.
Robert Frisch
Location: 87144, RIO RANCHO
Submitted At: 7:00pm 01-19-22
Did you know more people die every year from hand and feet attacks than they do from rifles? And just think of the millions throughout history that have died from swords. Focusing on the instrument is a backwards and ineffective attempt equivalent to treating the symptoms of cancer, but not the cancer itself.
Oh, and your proposal is illegal and against the Constitution. "Any law repugnant to the constitution is no law, has no force of law and can be ignored." (Marbury v. Madison) David Levesque
Location: 01824, CHELMSFORD
Submitted At: 7:00pm 01-19-22
I would just like to say to the clueless politicians that all lawful gun owners want to end gun violence as much as you do. Making laws to punish me he legal gun owners is not going to do this. It is not legal gun owners that are involved in gun violence. It is all of the gangs and illegal gun "owners". How about giving the police some money and flexibility to go after them They seem to get more rights than lawful gun owners in liberal run areas. Pathetic.
Kare Dalton
Location:
Submitted At: 6:58pm 01-19-22
Focus on the criminals for once! Stop trying to punish law abiding citizens for acts committed by criminals. This is unacceptable an enough is enough!!!
DANIEL STEECH
Location: 85267, SCOTTSDALE
Submitted At: 6:56pm 01-19-22
Pushing law abiding folks to the brink of uprising.
kurt nordquist
Location: 95337, manteca
Submitted At: 6:55pm 01-19-22
there's supposed to be a right, contained in the second amendment to the constiution Maybe if they lived there before. but I dont think so!
Robert Macek
Location: 63109, Saint Louis
Submitted At: 6:53pm 01-19-22
Having lived in Cupertino and Mountain View I’ve seen California quality of life deteriorate with every trip I make to the Bay Area. The gangs do not care about nor will they pay any firearms tax. This is a purely punitive unconstitutional tax on lawful gun owners. More tyranny of the masses. I predict an increase in serious crime.
Good job jefe.
Richard Biggerstaff
Location: 98620, Goldendale
Submitted At: 6:52pm 01-19-22
oppose a tax of any kind on gun ownership
Eric Ireton
Location: 78240, San Antonio
Submitted At: 6:51pm 01-19-22
Stop trying to punish law abiding citizens for acts committed by criminals. Focus on the criminals for once! Thomas Jordan
Location: 91605, North Hollywood
Submitted At: 6:51pm 01-19-22
Ridiculous and pointless tax to end gun violence that is not committed by law abiding citizens. Why should law abiding citizens have to pay for defending themselves or hunter pay again when they already pay for licenses and in cases even hunts on BLM land.
This serves no practical purpose.
Kenneth Coyne
Location: 95747, CA - Roseville
Submitted At: 6:48pm 01-19-22
I oppose this tax guns. Please vote no on this ordinance.
John Duchek
Location: 88301, Carrizozo
Submitted At: 6:47pm 01-19-22
When will you figure out that the people are the problem, not objects. If you deal with the people and get them to stop killing people, people will not die. It is called responsibility. California is large group of bad ideas. Please start doing some critical thinking soon. Thanks,
John
Margaret Koch
Location: 63368, O Fallon
Submitted At: 6:46pm 01-19-22
It doesn't make sense to continue to punish law-abiding citizens for the actions of criminals. Forcing law-abiding citizens to pay an additional tax (on top of the sales tax they paid when they purchased weapons) will do absolutely nothing to alter the actions of criminals, most of whom do not purchase guns from legal sources but steal them. Punish the criminals, not the law-abiding citizens. donna gonzales
Location: 42160-7737, Park City
Submitted At: 6:46pm 01-19-22
Why do this? It is sad that everyone is trying to tax everything. Apparently anti gun people is pushing for their agenda. Reminds me of bullies because you have power. Just sad so drink your $6 coffee ,eat your plant based food and drive your electic cars. Thinking your smarter than everyone else. Just bullies! Richard Bagley
Location: 90604, Whittier
Submitted At: 6:46pm 01-19-22
Stop coming after responsible citizens with these nazi Germany solutions where no problem exists. Invest sometime in ensuring that criminals are prosecuted instead. Real criminals preying on law abiding citizens. We the people are tired of tax dollars being wasted on these phoney laws being made up. This is not Communist China. The 2nd Amendment is for the public good to deter career criminals.
Carolyn Pappas
Location: 90069
Submitted At: 6:46pm 01-19-22
If you can tax all of the criminals that have guns, you can do this. If not, it is absurd.
David Aaronson
Location: 89521-8238, Reno
Submitted At: 6:45pm 01-19-22
How are you going to get the people with illegal to pay their taxes? Go after them, not upstanding citizens! Y ou don't CARE about getting the real problem addressed! Total BS! Jules Boverie
Location: 79411, Lubbock
Submitted At: 6:45pm 01-19-22
This is just a back door way to suppress the poor from being able to defend themselves William Max
Location: 22460, Farnham
Submitted At: 6:43pm 01-19-22
One of the reasons that the founding fathers wrote the Bill of Rights was that they looked ahead into the beady eyes of politicians like you and asked &amp;amp;quot;do we trust these bastards?&amp;amp;quot; The overwhelming response was &amp;amp;quot; (reference to the nether regions) no!&amp;amp;quot; That is why they wrote the Bill of Rights. The freedoms that it guarantees are sacred.
When you start to infringe on them you are working towards a totalitarian government.
M Barrett
Location: 85069, Phoenix
Submitted At: 6:43pm 01-19-22
Stop attacking our 2nd Amendment rights! This will do nothing to reduce "gun violence". Criminals do not aquire their firearms by legal means. "Gun control" is a joke! What needs control is the criminal. Arrest, prosecute and keep them in jail. Stop this political nonsense! Stop punishing the law abiding citizens. Y ou are destroying your city and state with all the radical policies and laws you try to pass. Choose American citizens over illegals.
John Zorkocy
Location: 44004, Ashtabula
Submitted At: 6:42pm 01-19-22
The poor people of color are the ones that will be most hurt by this law. Criminals will laugh at you for making their work easier.
Eric Stout
Location: 18603-5052, Berwick
Submitted At: 6:40pm 01-19-22
Stop this stupidity
Gregory Beaves
Location: 77077, Houston
Submitted At: 6:38pm 01-19-22
Placing a tax upon firearms owned by citizens is an idea that has no basis in law. Taxiing the civil right to own firearms would be as egregious as a poll tax. Ownership of firearms is a civil right--an individual civil right--and has been incorporated as against the state and local governments. Please re-read Heller and McDonald. I'm a career law enforcement officer and have been an attorney for three decades, not some "deplorable" to be easily dismissed.
Dennis Cone
Location: 99354, Richland
Submitted At: 6:37pm 01-19-22
I request respectfully that you do not impose a tax on guns already owned and tax paid when purchased. I know I am not in your district but I am concerned this can spread to other areas and not to just guns. Please reconsider.
Logan Shea
Location: 91214, Los angeles
Submitted At: 6:36pm 01-19-22
I strongly oppose a tax on individuals for exercising their constitutional rights Of firearm ownership. This would be akin to taxation for speech or religious worship. Strongly oppose.
Len bullard
Location: 19146, Phila
Submitted At: 6:36pm 01-19-22
What you are attempting to do is against the law as embedded in federal government legislation. Any gun registry efforts is sure to be challenged in court over turned and open the door for more gun rights protection. This is the United States not the United Kingdom or Australia, remember we have a bill of rights which cannot be legislated out of excess no matter how hard you try. As a matter of fact, you should be tried for treason against the constitution of the United States
Mark Sikes
Location: 95127, San Jose
Submitted At: 6:36pm 01-19-22
Please do not pass this, it has many issues: it unduly hurts good but disadvantaged citizens, it forces upstanding citizens to pay for others' criminal behavior, it establishes a tax on constitutional rights which is itself illegal, it constitutes a backdoor gun registry, etc.
Passing this will end up actually costing San Jose a lot of money and make the city look worse to businesses and others that we should be attracting.
Mike Kevitt
Location: 28602, Hickory
Submitted At: 6:33pm 01-19-22
San Jose, CA, should not tax guns or gun ownership. It's as unconstitutional and unlawful as taxing for home or auto ownership or ownership of anything else. If San Jose does it, it and all other copycat cities will be subject to endless and very called for legal action. Mike Kevitt Ryan Meister
Location:
Submitted At: 6:30pm 01-19-22
It is it fair nor is there an appropriate precedent for you to impose a gun tax.
Stephen Tidwell
Location: 19947, GEORGETOWN
Submitted At: 6:28pm 01-19-22
Bad idea. It is nothing but a backdoor illegal gun registry.
Thomas Dunlap
Location: 17740, Jersey Shore
Submitted At: 6:27pm 01-19-22
No taxes or back door registries
Sharon Kistler
Location: 06878, Riverside
Submitted At: 6:25pm 01-19-22
No back door gun registries or taxes!
C J
Location: 17019, Dillsburg
Submitted At: 6:25pm 01-19-22
Y ou corrupt politicians have no business even trying this, remember the constitution!!! Elwood Porter
Location: 84096, Herriman
Submitted At: 6:24pm 01-19-22
Please do NOT pass the proposed gun tax for your area. Gun ownership per the Second Amendment is a protected right of Americans under our Constitution.
Kennith Blankenship
Location: 85208, Mesa
Submitted At: 6:24pm 01-19-22
This is unconstitutional. It goes against Americans right to arm and protect themselves. With all the crime going on in California especially now due to the liberal agenda, there should be a great outcry for more people to bear arms to protect themselves. Wake up California's and take back your state government and protect your family.
Dennis Egbert
Location: 36117-3954, Montgomery
Submitted At: 6:22pm 01-19-22
This is a thinly veiled attempt to create a gun registry. It’s so blatantly wrong and in violation of the Second Amendment and should be dropped now!
craig johnson
Location: 92648, Huntington Beach
Submitted At: 6:22pm 01-19-22
Y ou can not put a tax on a constitutionally protected right. Just as you can not tax someone for giving their opinion. This is just another illegal attempt at gun registry. I strongly oppose this ordinance and anyone involved in trying to pass this
Helen Smith
Location: 33917, N Fort Myers
Submitted At: 6:21pm 01-19-22
Its a constitutional right to own a gun without a tax or fee. This is discriminatory against gun owners.
Ernest Stone
Location: 62521, Decatur
Submitted At: 6:19pm 01-19-22
This is wrong please don’t pass this ordinance.
Dave Berent
Location: 95113, San Jose
Submitted At: 6:19pm 01-19-22
A gun tax is just a back door gun registry. Check with the California DOJ. They already have that information.
Don't waste my tax payer money as you will be going to court and this law and tax will be found unconstitutional.
CHUCK MAURER
Location: 78677, DRIPPING SPRINGS
Submitted At: 6:18pm 01-19-22
THIS IS NOTHING GUN A GUN REGISTRATION STRATEGY - YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED.
James Macek
Location: 32967-3610, VERO BEACH
Submitted At: 6:18pm 01-19-22
Please reconsider the tax on guns.
James McCormack
Location: 82009, Cheyenne
Submitted At: 6:16pm 01-19-22
This must be the most racist idea I've ever seen!
Darin Kats
Location: 74011, Broken Arrow
Submitted At: 6:15pm 01-19-22
A tax on gun ownership will reduce gun harm? Why don't you spend your time passing ordinances that will actually help your community, not punish law abiding citizens.
Trent Brady
Location: 28636, Hiddenite
Submitted At: 6:14pm 01-19-22
stupid thing I have ever heard people will hid their gun. This country is getting closer to becoming a communist country,,
Michael Alley
Location:
Submitted At: 6:13pm 01-19-22
Why can't the politicians in California put their own citizens first and allow them to protect themselves.
Ronald Kooyenga
Location:
Submitted At: 6:12pm 01-19-22
Do not pass laws to try an "end around" of the constitution.
Instead of creating more gun registration and bans. how about enforcing any laws already on the books.
Pete Gilmour
Location:
Submitted At: 6:11pm 01-19-22
Y ou have no constitutional RIGHT to impose this TAX on our FREEDOMS Stuart Gillespie
Location: 40229-2779, Louisville
Submitted At: 6:11pm 01-19-22
Please note that many from across the country are following and oppose your gun control proposals. Please note that you are leading your city toward very expensive legal action. Best regards
IAN NASCIMENTO
Location: 91701, Rancho Cucamonga
Submitted At: 6:10pm 01-19-22
A TAX IS A CLEAR THREAT AGAINST THE 2ND AMENDMENT.
Vondia Caruso
Location: 93314-9043, Bakersfield
Submitted At: 6:10pm 01-19-22
Do NOT do this!!!
Melanie Bruno
Location: 91355, VALENCIA
Submitted At: 6:10pm 01-19-22
Y ou have no right or authority to pass ANY so-called legislation against our right to own ffirearms or to tax them out of existence. It's against our human right to defend ourselves from a TYRANNICAL GOVERNMENT like you, which is the precise reason we have the Second Amendment. Y ou CANNOT make laws against it! Allan Bouquin
Location: 14063, Fredonia
Submitted At: 6:08pm 01-19-22
Follow the Constitution!
Duane Pearson
Location: 80126, Highlands Ranch
Submitted At: 6:08pm 01-19-22
It always amazes me how ignorant people think by punishing law abiding citizens, you are making the world a safer place. PUNISH criminals and actually put them in prison for breaking laws. It is the only thing that will work.
There just aren't any other words for this stupidity. Why do you think there are so many first time gun buyers in the last 2 years. Because they fear for their life because of defunding police and District Attorney's that don't prosecute criminal. Y ou have everything wrong.
Thomas Richey
Location: 59101, BILLINGS
Submitted At: 6:08pm 01-19-22
As we all know the majority of gun owners are law abiding people. The criminals are the ones we have to worry about. To pass more laws, rules, and more and more unconstitutional things like this only enables the criminals and takes the Rights out of law abiding citizens hands. Stop the craziness already and focus and handling the criminals.
John Buck
Location: 74956, Shady Point
Submitted At: 6:01pm 01-19-22
I read this proposal and have to wonder what it accomplishes other than punishing law abiding citizens who own a gun. It will not apply to criminals or illegals as California's state government seems to go out of their way to protect them. This is an unconstitutional proposal. The California legislators certainly have learned nothing from history.
James Downs
Location: 91750, La Verne
Submitted At: 5:55pm 01-19-22
Not one piece of anti-freedom legislation that the commies have pushed through has done anything to save lives or curtail crime. Any government official that espouses ideals antithetical to their oath should be imprisoned for treason and sedition, period!
RICHARD DEUSSEN
Location: 38901, Grenada
Submitted At: 5:54pm 01-19-22
I oppose tax on fire arms.
Robert Osborne
Location: 85901, Show Low
Submitted At: 5:54pm 01-19-22
Remember your American History! Prohibition didn't work and increased criminal empires power/control over folks like YOU!
Don Schenck
Location:
Submitted At: 5:51pm 01-19-22
I oppose the proposed tax on firearm ownership. This will do nothing to reduce "gun violence". As you are well aware of, criminals do not aquire their firearms by legal means. They will not come forward and make themselves known to any authority as owners of a firearm. "Gun control" is a joke and the public knows it. What needs control is the criminal. Arrest, prosecute and keep in the jail. Watch your crime and lead posion deaths drop. Nail the criminals! Stop this political nonsense!
Daniel Olsen
Location:
Submitted At: 5:51pm 01-19-22
Bad idea!!!
edward mikan
Location:
Submitted At: 5:50pm 01-19-22
STOP IT!!!!
T Slayback
Location: 33478, Jupiter
Submitted At: 5:50pm 01-19-22
Oppose. This reeks of 1930s Nazi Germany. Don't be a Nazi.
Eric Dahl
Location: 94086, Sunnyvale
Submitted At: 5:48pm 01-19-22
I vehemently oppose this gun ownership tax you are proposing. Why don't you fill in the potholes...our roads are worse than some third world countries.
Y ou need to stop attacking legal law abiding citizens. Do something for a change like prosecute criminals for criminal acts they do.
Craig Schmidt
Location: 77982, Port O'Connor
Submitted At: 5:46pm 01-19-22
This is clearly a violation of the Second Amendment of the US Constitution. What is it about 'Shall not be infringed" do you mental midgets not understand? This action is unconscionable and despicable.
Ron Frame
Location: 75763, Frankston
Submitted At: 5:43pm 01-19-22
Communism will be resisted. Let the people protect themselves without paying for the right. Y ou have no authority to tax what is a God given and Constitutional right.
Brian Shields
Location: 19114, PHILADELPHIA
Submitted At: 5:37pm 01-19-22
No taxation without representation.
Y ou are traitors for violating the second amendment and should be ashamed of yourself. Y ou should also be tried for treason.
warren shipman
Location:
Submitted At: 5:35pm 01-19-22
EVERYBODY LEAVE THIS SH-T HOLE
Stanley Dryszczak
Location: 33928, Estero
Submitted At: 5:30pm 01-19-22
What's next the air we breath.
Keith Tarvin
Location: 75656, Hughes Springs
Submitted At: 5:30pm 01-19-22
Leave it to California to do something stupid like this. Maybe that's why people are moving out of California as quickly as they are !!!!
Thomas Mehalek
Location: 85739, Tucson
Submitted At: 5:25pm 01-19-22
This ordinance is unconstitutional and violates more than amendments than the 2nd. Please uphold your sworn duty and vote against this ordinance.
Mike Mclaughlin
Location:
Submitted At: 5:24pm 01-19-22
This is an unconstitutional attack on our 2nd amendment rights Randy Shaneck
Location: 49007, Kalamazoo
Submitted At: 5:24pm 01-19-22
Taxing items that have already been taxed? But then again what do you di right in Cali but tax the rank and file citizen. Lord's and masters...
eric king
Location: 94709, berkeley
Submitted At: 5:23pm 01-19-22
taxing the right to own a gun is no different than taxing the right to vote. poll taxes have been ruled against by the supreme court. why is a tax on gun ownership, a constitutional right, any different than a tax on voting, also a constitutional right?
Franklin Welch
Location: 85614, Green Valley
Submitted At: 5:23pm 01-19-22
Most stop this unconstitutional attempt to distort our rights Roy Guinn
Location: 37770, Lancing
Submitted At: 5:21pm 01-19-22
This is a blatant and unconstitutional attack on law-abiding gun owners. In no way will it decrease gun violence. I urge you to not pass this legislation.
Andrew Bucior
Location: 27409, Greensboro
Submitted At: 5:20pm 01-19-22
There are many truly important issues that should be dealt with. Instead of grandstanding with an unconstitutional move that will only waste time, energy, and money, do your actual job to improve the lives of the citizens.
Gary Kunz
Location: 84067, Roy
Submitted At: 5:18pm 01-19-22
This is an unconstitutional attack on our 2nd amendment rights Don Brotzman
Location: 99623, wasilla
Submitted At: 5:18pm 01-19-22
i am totally against any type of gun owner tax
Charles Cullens
Location: 27909, Elizabeth City
Submitted At: 5:18pm 01-19-22
Do not mess with our gun rights.
Charlotte Wirrell
Location: 02072, Stoughton
Submitted At: 5:17pm 01-19-22
Agenda Item 4.1 22-045 Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance please vote against it. 2nd Amendment rights Anthony Glab
Location: 21078, Havre de Grace
Submitted At: 5:17pm 01-19-22
Prosecute the criminals and hold them responsible. It really is that simple.
Jonathan Perella
Location: 01830, Haverhill
Submitted At: 5:16pm 01-19-22
Another tool of coercion, allowing only certain members of the public to have second amendment rights while deny others. Y ou could instead offer free training trigger locks and uphold the laws already on the books. Be well and thanks for your time.
Michael Riba
Location: 91304, Canoga park
Submitted At: 5:13pm 01-19-22
Ditto:
The first nor the second amendments shall not be infringed upon in any form! Bonnie Hackett
Location: 03908, S Berwick
Submitted At: 5:11pm 01-19-22
This is an unconstitutional attack on our 2nd amendment rights.
David Fisher
Location: 08073, Rancocas
Submitted At: 5:09pm 01-19-22
The first nor the second ammendments shall not be infringed upon in any form! Agenda Item: eComments for 4. PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES
Overall Sentiment
Makeit Makesense
Location:
Submitted At: 11:38am 01-25-22
I oppose the gun ordinance. The law abiding citizens who are gun owners are not the ones committing the gun crimes, but have to pay for those who do. It makes absolutely no sense to keep avoiding the part that "guns do not kill people" but rather "people kill people." There have been tons of warning signs and even police acknowledgement of having information on previous mass shooters. The inability to do something about these serious threats is the real issue. Take accountability for failures! SJ Resident
Location: 95126
Submitted At: 11:31am 01-25-22
*Not a gun owner*
The city should focus on strengthening mental health, family outreach, and rehabilitation programs. The real criminals buy their guns off the black market. In reality the city will unfairly tax responsible adults. Additionally, taxing gun owners will discourage the middle and lower class from legally practicing their 2nd amendment right. If this does pass, I hope LEAs are included because they too cause damage, shoot innocent people, and commit suicide with their own weapons.
Jim Krepelka
Location: 95118, San jose
Submitted At: 10:22am 01-25-22
I oppose taxing the Bill of Rights and therefore the proposed gun ownership tax. Southern democrats once charged a poll tax on people of color to discourage them from participating in voting. Now San Jose Democrats are attempting a gun ownership tax to discourage residents from participating in the second amendment.
Shame on the city council for this. Shame on the Mayor for not correcting them.
Tim McMahon
Location:
Submitted At: 10:15am 01-25-22
Oppose
It is unconstitutional, immoral and reprehensible to tax an enumerated right.
It is wrong to single out a segment of the law abiding population and force them to bare the burden of paying for criminal activity for which they have no control.
It is unvirtuous to provide funding to third party entities which will in turn provide political support to their benefactors.
This will have no effect on deterring criminal activity but chill and burden the exercise of a constitutional right.
Jehoia Garcia
Location: 95127, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:54am 01-25-22
Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance.
1. The ordinance is a violation of court rulings against Jim Crow laws that tax constitutional rights.
2. The city has already been placed on notice that if the ordinance is passed it will be sued by numerous organizations. The city will be bogged down in legal actions for at least 5 years.
3. The non-profit group set up to manage this ordinance is nothing more than a slush fund. The proposal states the city can not direct how funds are used.
Paul Tersac
Location: 92675, San Juan Capistrano
Submitted At: 9:29am 01-25-22
From an anti-gunner:" It requires those who own guns be responsible for the costs incurred by San Jose taxpayers when responding and dealing with gun related crimes." Response... Nonsense. Enforce existing laws!
From an anti-gunner: "There is no other industrialized nation in the world that experiences the amount of death from guns."
Response... Take out the large city slaughters and the USA is very low on the list. Another misinformed person.
VOTE NO!
John Gnaegy
Location: 95033, Los Gatos
Submitted At: 9:27am 01-25-22
This is a divisive issue which will only turn more voters Republican, and democracy is already hanging by a thread. The entire Republican Party has gone off the deep end of refusing to abide by election results in favor of Trump's cult of personality. Do you really want to sacrifice any more votes to that camp? Do not pass this.
Paul Burt
Location: 95123, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:21am 01-25-22
Y our concern about firearms crime - while well founded - is acutely off the mark with this proposed ordinance.
What is critical for all those in government - throughout the Nation - to understand, is that nearly 90 percent of those arrested the very first time wherein firearms-involved charges are exclusive and or inclusive, will be rearrested within the same criteria. It is - 9 times out of 10 - the repeat, violent offender committing violent crimes.
Time for tougher sentencing!
Christa Meakins
Location:
Submitted At: 9:14am 01-25-22
I strongly oppose the “Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance”. It is completely illogical to claim that adding costs for law abiding citizens to exercise their constitutional rights will help reduce crime. Are you really not aware that actual criminals don’t care about your laws?
Mark K
Location: 92679
Submitted At: 9:08am 01-25-22
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance. Taxing law abiding gun owners will not solve the problems created by criminals illegally discharging firearms or people who cause harm because they are mentally ill. Please don't react with a knee-jerk reaction, rather seek to understand and solve real problems caused by criminals and mentally ill people.
Connor Jordan
Location: san jose
Submitted At: 8:43am 01-25-22
Please use common sense to gun violence and do NOT tax law abiding citizens as a means to address this issue such as the Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance. Law abiding citizens do not need further taxation or fees levied on them when purchasing firearms. Work with the CPRA to help improve gun education! These futile methods will not work, and only punish law abiding citizens.
mike johnson
Location: 95129
Submitted At: 8:41am 01-25-22
Good morning. I am writing to express my opposition to the above proposed ordinance.
Criminals are the problem, not law abiding gun owners. Y ou do not have the right to tax people for exercising their Constitutional Rights. In addition, using the tax you collect to defend your unconstitutional ordinance is morally reprehensible.
Gary G
Location:
Submitted At: 8:26am 01-25-22
This is yet another pointless attempt to vilify and punish LAWFUL FIREARMS OWNERS for simply exercising their constitutional right to possess them. We shooting sports participants should not be required to purchase some completely unnecessary insurance policy which would be totally ineffective for the purposes this ordinance is proposing. It's nothing more than a punishment to rightful gun owners and a backdoor way of getting all our firearms registered for your REAL GOAL of total CONFISCATION.
Mark Hicks
Location:
Submitted At: 8:21am 01-25-22
Good morning. I am writing to express my opposition to the above proposed ordinance.
Criminals are the problem, not law abiding gun owners. Y ou do not have the right to tax people for exercising their Constitutional Rights. In addition, using the tax you collect to defend your unconstitutional ordinance is morally reprehensible.
Sincerely,
Mark Hicks
A H Hedges
Location:
Submitted At: 8:10am 01-25-22
This law would serve to increase inequality and institutionalized racism in our society by disenfranchising and criminalizing the poor who lack the means to pay additional expenses to exercise their rights or means to live in more expensive neighborhoods where they feel safe and have adequate police protection.
ALBERTO GARCIA
Location: 91710-3814, Chino
Submitted At: 8:04am 01-25-22
Another tax on the law abiding citizens isn't the solution. If you really care about gun crime you and any other official that agrees with you should fund this proposed program with a percentage of your salary. It will do two things at minimum. 1 it will demonstrate how deeply you care. 2 you won't impose a tax on people that don't break the law and try their best to survive at a time when inflation is above 7%. Taxing the people to fund a program you want isn't right. Respect our lives
Robert Blank
Location: 95117, San Jose
Submitted At: 7:42am 01-25-22
Illegal and stupid. Prosecute actual criminals and don't persecute the law abiding. Read the Constitution. Y ou don't have the authority to violate the
the rights of Americans. The voters will hold you accountable.
Brian Liebelt
Location: 95242, Lodi
Submitted At: 7:37am 01-25-22
Please do not tax the law abiding citizens of San Jose with the Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance.
Andrei Mihai
Location: 92596, Winchester
Submitted At: 7:32am 01-25-22
Criminals are going to take advantage of this unconstitutional law and we, the law abiding citizens ,will suffer.
Walter Gross
Location: 94087, Sunnyvale
Submitted At: 7:03am 01-25-22
Dear Council: Y our 'Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance' is primarily monetary. What harm will be reduced? Criminals create the harm and honest citizens would pay. If you want to reduce harm, direct your efforts towards those that create the harm, the criminal element. Wait, already done with the current laws criminals don't follow.
Russell Vanwinkle
Location: 85126, San Jose
Submitted At: 6:02am 01-25-22
Requiring a Citizen to pay a “fee” to exercise an enumerated Right is clearly unconstitutional. This would be equivalent to requiring a “fee” to be paid every year for your right to political speech. I strongly suggest the Council spent a few minutes with a dictionary, the US Constitution, and the State Constitution paying particular attention to the Second Amendment’s “shall not be infringed” clause and the State’s Article 1 Section 1’s right to protect property.
Quoc Nguyen
Location: 95123, San Jose
Submitted At: 4:03am 01-25-22
Criminals shoot law abiding citizens but you want to make law abiding citizens who want to defend themselves to pay?
Make the criminals pay first. Owning guns legally doesn't endanger the public J Garcia
Location:
Submitted At: 3:10am 01-25-22
I have been around the block for a day or two and I may consider if and only if, that me paying for insurance guarantees that the City of San Jose shall issue me a CCW permit valid in California. Why else would I need insurance if no permit is issued?
ROGER FELLOWS
Location: 94040-3908, MOUNTAIN VIEW
Submitted At: 2:52am 01-25-22
Crime increases, police defunded; let's shift the blame to law abiding citizens...
Mark Philbrook
Location: 94947, Novato
Submitted At: 2:45am 01-25-22
We dont need another ordinance that penalizes law abiding citizens exercising their 2 Amendment rights! Andrew Gacanich
Location: 95662, Orangevale
Submitted At: 2:32am 01-25-22
Let Second Amendment Reign !
Ke Li
Location: 95125, San jose
Submitted At: 12:49am 01-25-22
That was illegal. Please do the right things for the city of San Jose.
S Allen
Location: Santa Barbara
Submitted At: 12:45am 01-25-22
When sanctuary is given to criminals, both citizens and non-citizens, that is a formula for an increase in crime.
When crime is not punished, police are hamstrung by politicians, and DAs do not prosecute criminals that is the cause of a breakdown in law and order. How despicable to especially target the law abiding gun owners to pay for the consequences of the violence perpetrated by criminals.
Binh Tran
Location: 95132, San Jose
Submitted At: 12:12am 01-25-22
At a time when hate crimes against people of color and other vulnerable communities is rising at alarming rates, I believe any laws aimed at hindering people’s right to protect themselves is not only wrong, but inherently racist.
The police are not only ineffective, but it is clear, they are complicit in violence against people of color. This will not reduce violence, only create more victims of hate crimes and worse. Our lives matter.
Sean Xu
Location:
Submitted At: 11:21pm 01-24-22
This is another scam of the government to infringe on Americans' constitutional right, to rob more hard earned money from a extremely diverse group of responsible gun owners, all in the name of safety. The people have woken up to these scams and will defeat any such attempts.
Michael Jones
Location: 91801, Alhambra
Submitted At: 11:10pm 01-24-22
Constitutional rights are not taxable.
Donald Task
Location:
Submitted At: 11:03pm 01-24-22
This scheme is just another ploy to collect revenue. It will NOT curtail crime. It will NOT make our community safer
Chris Lugatiman
Location:
Submitted At: 10:59pm 01-24-22
Anyone with common sense does not understand how taxing law-abiding citizens would lower and/or stop crime.
Criminals obtain firearms in underground black markets, not firearms stores or gun shows where the laws are followed. Taxing law-abiding citizens exercising their American right is like going to a heart surgeon for hip surgery, you are not addressing the real problem with real solutions.
Kyle Bowles
Location: 95122, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:45pm 01-24-22
This law is just another attempt to punish, trip-up, & infringe on the rights of reasonable responsible gun-owners by the city of San Jose.
It doesn’t define the fee to be charged. How the fees are to be spent is horrible broad & vague, leaving it ripe for abuse. It excludes various privileged people who have special friendships or made generous gifts to the sheriff for Conceal Carry permits.
Furthermore it sets a dangerous example of how to disengage local gun owners from reasonable policy.
Colin Gallagher
Location: 93940, Monterey
Submitted At: 10:41pm 01-24-22
As spokesperson for DCR (DefendingConstitutionalRights.com), I state for the record that any proposal which would require gun insurance and a tax on guns, ammunition or both, is clearly unconstitutional. While U.S.
Congress might be able to make a law relating to change in FAET (Firearms, Ammunition and Excise Tax), that would be the decision and purview of Congress, not of the State(s) or of local jurisdictions. The City's proposed Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance must be rejected.
Steven Jordan
Location: San Jose
Submitted At: 10:36pm 01-24-22
Please legislate laws that are truly useful and beneficial Steven Chirco
Location: 95124, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:35pm 01-24-22
Why is it politicians always want to attack law abiding gun owners rights?! All the while our DAs will not charge crimes where the suspect used a gun appropriately. They consistently fail to charge the gun enhancement for use of the firearm. There are all ready enough gun laws on the books, just have the DAs actually charge appropriately and lock criminals up! I am a retired army vet & all I see is government curtailing our Constitutional Rights.
What the h*** did I fight for overseas then?!
Janett Miller
Location:
Submitted At: 10:26pm 01-24-22
I'm a democrat, and I even think this is sketch. What's next? Taxing social media to pay for a socialized mental health program?
AV V
Location:
Submitted At: 10:26pm 01-24-22
Oppose. Why you tax the law binding citizen to protect themselves? Why you don't tax the criminals? Why you don't stop the corrupted politician who abuse their authority, tell them stop the corruptions and stop wasting our tax money!
Greg Lytle
Location: 95135, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:17pm 01-24-22
This proposed ordinance and any variation of it should be permanently abandoned. There is no clear path to achieve the stated objective. It is a thinly veiled attempt to rid San Jose residents of lawful firearm ownership yet does nothing to effect illegitimate use of firearms.
Joe OConnor
Location: 95130
Submitted At: 10:17pm 01-24-22
Strongly oppose …. This is an unacceptable ordinance
Tax paying home owners are not the issue …
Hold the criminals accountable !!!
Ben Lee
Location:
Submitted At: 9:59pm 01-24-22
What is your purpose trying to make American people become so weak? C Kwan
Location:
Submitted At: 9:54pm 01-24-22
This proposal is a blatant infringement on peoples second amendment rights. Y ou cannot tax or mandate a right guaranteed by the U.S. constitution. I urge the city to cease and desist this proposal due to the massive and irreparable legal as well as financial repercussions the city will face if this is enacted.
Howard Young
Location: 94588, Pleasanton
Submitted At: 9:50pm 01-24-22
See the 2A
Joe Li
Location: 95131, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:37pm 01-24-22
This proposal cannot provide a safer community environment nor reduce gun violence since this proposal only penalize law-abiding gun owners instead of criminal s with illegal guns. Second, why should law abiding owners pay for the damages caused by criminals?
Jon Loberg
Location: 95102, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:37pm 01-24-22
What are you hiding?
D Beard
Location:
Submitted At: 9:33pm 01-24-22
this is nothing more than an unconstitutional attempt to deprive rights and to score political points by causing misery for firearm owner citizens. Will do nothing to reduce crime, will cost taxpayers to defend in court against the inevitable lawsuit. Shame on you SJ. Please do the work of the people rather than this ill-conceived nonsense.
Walter Song
Location: 95131, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:31pm 01-24-22
Taxing lawful gun owners will not solve gun violence problem. Arrest and incarceration of all criminals will. STOP targeting law abiding citizens. Refund the police and prosecute criminals to the max extent if you want the problem to end!
Edward Martinez
Location: 9512, San Jose
Submitted At: 8:52pm 01-24-22
I oppose the taxes and mandatory buying insurance because some one committed a crime against you. Stop making the law abiding citizens pay for criminals.
Hong Luo
Location: 95132, San jose
Submitted At: 8:37pm 01-24-22
This will never help to stoping criminals
Scott Zbornak
Location: 92647-4940, Huntington Beach
Submitted At: 8:30pm 01-24-22
Taxing lawful gun owners will not solve your gun violence problem. Arrest and incarceration of criminals will.
STOP targeting law abiding citizens. Refund the police and prosecute criminals if you want the problem to end! Ian Lockwood
Location: 92071, Santee
Submitted At: 8:26pm 01-24-22
Y our proposed Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance just makes you seem bigoted against lawful gun owners. Y ou really shouldn't do this.
Aaron Vu
Location: 95136, San Jose
Submitted At: 8:26pm 01-24-22
Attacking law abiding gun owners for the actions of criminals is absolutely wrong. When a criminal wants a gun they aren't going to go buy it in a gun store and pay taxes and have their names tied to the weapon instead they will buy it off the streets somewhere and not pay taxes on it so in reality this does nothing but hurt the citizens of this city.
Jason Beltran
Location: 94088, San jose
Submitted At: 8:19pm 01-24-22
Criminal don’t follow rules. These dumb laws don’t make it hard for anybody except for law abiding citizens who wish to have a means to defend themselves. This has been said time and again. IT DOESNT WORK! Y ou can ban kitchen knive, and people will still find a way to be violent. It’s not the tools, its the people.
Richard Brooks
Location:
Submitted At: 8:14pm 01-24-22
The mayor himself said this will do nothing to stop gun violence. How about punish criminals instead of turning them loose and inviting more to come to our city! This will only cost taxpayers millions in lawsuits and do nothing to keep guns out of the hands that they dont belong in. Please oppose!!! Sy Nazif
Location: 92610, foothill ranch
Submitted At: 8:10pm 01-24-22
The Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance is blame-shifting: taxing law-abiding citizens for the actions of criminals. It is an unconstitutional attack on the right to keep and bear arms. Then in a twisted irony, making them pay for the City's violation of their own civil rights, by paying the legal fees to defend this unlawful ordinance. I urge you to follow the law and vote no. If you truly want to keep this city safe, start by supporting your police officers, and keeping criminals in jail.
Jeremy Wong
Location: 95121, San Jose
Submitted At: 8:07pm 01-24-22
I do not understand why responsible gun owners are forced to foot the bill for the city’s gun control wish list… I fail to see how this tax will make anyone safer, and instead see an unconstitutional measure placed upon citizens who did not directly vote on this.
Firearms are a strong deterrent and means of self defense. I fail to see how making the price of such a deterrent higher makes the city or the citizens any safer from criminals.
If this passes see you in court.
Jason C
Location:
Submitted At: 7:52pm 01-24-22
This is a very misguided attempt for the city council to say that they made a difference. I’m sure this will make people “feel” safer, but in reality accomplishes nothing. How about the homeless and rising crime rates? Let’s go for the low hanging fruit instead of addressing the important issues.
Huaying Ji
Location:
Submitted At: 7:51pm 01-24-22
Do something to make city a safe place for citizens. This isn’t going to do anything good.
Shu Liu
Location:
Submitted At: 7:49pm 01-24-22
Y our actions are very bizarre and unreasonable! It's like: Y ou want to prevent the rape of women in San Jose, and then you do orchiectomy on every man in San Jose
eric king
Location: 94709, berkeley
Submitted At: 7:46pm 01-24-22
i am opposed to any tax on people exercising their rights under the second amendment to the u.s. constitution. this is no different than a poll tax on voting.
for the record, most of my politics are liberal/progressive. please vote "no" on this proposed legislation.
Robert Chang
Location: 95128, San Jose
Submitted At: 7:45pm 01-24-22
I have a degree and Criminal Justice Studies - this will do nothing but penalize law abiding citizens and divert police resources. Please go after the real criminals - ghost guns, repeat gang and theft offenders. This will not affect any of the serious criminals in our community.
Xinzeng Wei
Location: 95124, San Jose
Submitted At: 7:40pm 01-24-22
This will never help to stoping criminals who tend to do illegal things.
Peter Y
Location: 95123, San Jose
Submitted At: 7:34pm 01-24-22
Insuring a right as a citizen makes no sense. This is another attempt to make legal firearm ownership more difficult. Vote No
Benyamin Madani
Location: 92694, Rancho Mission Viejo
Submitted At: 7:32pm 01-24-22
Will you ban alcohol and drugs if we present the same logic? Why two standards if we are only to look at the outcomes?
John Wayne
Location:
Submitted At: 7:30pm 01-24-22
The Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance is nothing more than a continued attack on then RIGHT to keep and bear arms. I urge you to vote no. Stop the harassment of law abiding citizens. If you want to keep this city safe, start by keeping criminals in jail.
Philip Wu
Location: 95070, Saratoga
Submitted At: 7:30pm 01-24-22
Policing criminals rather than taxing people with arms. Banning guns won’t stop crimes. People who arm with guns can make criminals fearing.
Andy Wang
Location: 95014, Cupertino
Submitted At: 7:23pm 01-24-22
This is punishment to legal citizens
Adrian Cone
Location: 90247, Gardena
Submitted At: 7:19pm 01-24-22
This is a continuation of California trying to lay at the feet of honest law abide gun owners, the violence, and sins of the world. During this time of the pandemic and other economic hardships, you now want to tax citizens for owning a firearm, and mandate firearm insurance when many are just trying to protect their families and put food on the table. This is just another way of violating our 2nd amendment rights.
Derrell Thomas
Location:
Submitted At: 7:03pm 01-24-22
Questions on taxation of privately owned firearms via the Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance. Will your city impose a tax on the following?
Our freedom of speech, and all other Rights?
The Supreme Court of the United States stated in Heller, the Second Amendment is not a second-class Right, but is equal to all other rights.
Do you expect criminals to stop because you tax good citizens their right to exercise defense from these violent offenders?
Tax criminals and gang members for violations.
Jianmin Li
Location: 95111, San Jose
Submitted At: 7:00pm 01-24-22
Each person should be responsible for his own action, not responsible for other’s stupid action.
William Plummer
Location: 93401, SAN LUIS OBISPO
Submitted At: 6:58pm 01-24-22
Y our city's behavior smells just like that of San Luis Obispo. Wherein the city council, in session, states "if you would like to speak, raise your hand and you will be recognized"...then the entire council stares at their worksheets and continues the meeting. I find their and your behavior to be very childish and definitely not complimentary to the word of the people. I strongly encourage you to oppose the Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance. Dr. Bill Plummer
ward wise
Location: 94030, Millbrae
Submitted At: 6:56pm 01-24-22
I would love to reduce or eliminate violence of all kinds in our chaotic world. However, placing (silly) restrictions on law-abiding citizens will solve NOTHING! We start by taking the criminal element off the streets. thank you Scott Mondloch
Location: 94518, concord
Submitted At: 6:48pm 01-24-22
Dear councilmembers, I am opposed to the Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance ! As a law abiding gun owner I feel that California has the best laws on the books already concerning gun safety. We are required to keep firearms locked up and away from people not familiar with safe gun handling practices. Y our notion to tax law biding gun owners and require insurance will do little in the name of gun safety. Thanks for allowing me to share on this subject, Scott Mondloch
Andrew Kozumplik
Location: 95126, San Jose
Submitted At: 6:34pm 01-24-22
I should not be forced to pay for someone else’s criminal liability. I will vote against the mayor and every other public official if this passes. This will also be an embarrassment to the city given its unconstitutionality.
Don Jessen
Location: 92314, Big Bear
Submitted At: 6:32pm 01-24-22
Dear Sirs, I Protest and Oppose this new ordinance and direct you to do the same on my behalf.
Jerry Yu
Location: 95111, San jose
Submitted At: 6:15pm 01-24-22
Democrats need to stop harming the society ASAP . California and San Jose are becoming a joke in the world.
The San Jose government and Mayer are harming human rights.
John Kunsemiller
Location: 93004, VENTURA, CA
Submitted At: 6:15pm 01-24-22
I oppose any requirement for specific liability insurance tied to gun ownership and I oppose any annual tax/fee for gun owners.
Denise King
Location: 94578, SAN LEANDRO
Submitted At: 6:13pm 01-24-22
I travel to Santa Clara County on business regularly. I urge the city council to oppose this unjust Gun Harm Reduction ordinance. It is another attempt to create overly burdensome rules that seek to undermine people's right to defend themselves. It does nothing to protect the law abiding and will not have an impact on the criminal.
Jeff Hagen
Location: 94063, Redwood City
Submitted At: 6:08pm 01-24-22
I am a frequent visitor to the city of San Jose and routinely conduct business there. As such, this seems to be in conflict with state law. Section 10.32.210 (A) requires "gun liability insurance policy ... specifically covering .. resulting from any negligent..."
It is specifically illegal in California to issue an insurance policy covering negligence. http://bergerkahn.com/wp- content/uploads/2014/09/Making-Sense-of-Californias-Accident-Requirement-in-Liability-Insurance-Policies-Part- I.pdf
LARRY SCHULTZ
Location:
Submitted At: 5:52pm 01-24-22
I oppose the proposed "Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance." It provides nothing but allows San Jose to "steal" my 2nd Amendment Rights. Currently, the policing of San Jose is poor, at best. The residents of this city have no protection provided by law enforcement. Legal gun owners, such as myself, are well aware of our duty to secure our weapons. Spend our tax dollars providing some protection for the residents, and not throw it at sill bills like this.
Deborah H
Location: San Jose
Submitted At: 5:16pm 01-24-22
I am a San Jose resident and I oppose this ordinance. It's already illegal to use weapons to assault or kill others.
Enforce the current laws and the punish criminals, not law abiding citizens.
Chad Eickel
Location: 95117, San Jose
Submitted At: 5:06pm 01-24-22
I urge the city council to oppose this unjust Gun Harm Reduction ordinance. It is another attempt to create overly burdensome rules that seek to undermine the people of San Jose's right to defend themselves in the face of increasing violence. This ordinance seeks only to punish and diminish law abiding firearms owners. It does nothing to stop illegal firearms use and gang violence. It also is of questionable legality and will cost the city potentially millions in legal fees when challenged.
Abraham Svoboda
Location: 94606, Oakland
Submitted At: 5:04pm 01-24-22
I strongly oppose the Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance. This is a very very concerning approach to promoting public safety. We can NOT allow a fundamental constitutional right to be to taxed. This is a direct obstacle to exercising a citizens right, regardless if it's the right to free speech, the right to free and fair trial, or the right own a firearm. We would never consider a voting tax, and this is ordinance is just as horribly conceived. Fundamentally wrong.
Henry Chavira
Location: 92647, Huntington Beach
Submitted At: 4:53pm 01-24-22
I do not support a tax on my Second Amendment rights. This is an attack on law abiding citizens not criminals.
Johnny Rotten
Location: San Jose
Submitted At: 4:46pm 01-24-22
Stop f’ing the Constitution. Y ou are traitors!!! Prosecute the criminals, you leftist twit… John Dunkin
Location: 91710, Chino
Submitted At: 4:43pm 01-24-22
I am strongly opposed to this ordinance or any other such type of law that would further regulate or restrict the lawful gun owner. Y ou can not make one person responsible for the actions of another. I find it hard to believe, that with all the statistical data available, you still think these laws will stop the criminal from being a criminal.
Michael Santini
Location: 95123, San Jose
Submitted At: 4:37pm 01-24-22
Stop adding more laws that do absolutely nothing. Go after criminals with harsher penalties, make it known to the public the penalties for the existing violent offenses.
Thomas Rose
Location:
Submitted At: 4:34pm 01-24-22
No more Ill conceived gun laws that don’t have a chance at reducing crime Richard Cohan
Location: 92021, El Cajon
Submitted At: 4:24pm 01-24-22
I oppose this measure
N D
Location:
Submitted At: 4:19pm 01-24-22
Law abiding gun owners are not the problem. This is a tax based on fiction. Gun violence is overwhelmingly committed with illegally obtained guns. Y ou are not taxing the problem, you are taxing only those that try to be good citizens and obey the laws.
H L
Location:
Submitted At: 4:16pm 01-24-22
Gun control does not decrease crime, because bad guys buy from the streets, from other bad guys. It only restrict the right of law abiding citizens to protect themselves. Especially in this day and age, when many local police and sheriff force is being defunded, and they won't show up for 20 mins, people have no choice but to protect themselves with their own guns. It's either them or you. Allow the law abiding citizens of CA to defend themselves Dale Chabino
Location: 95212, Morada
Submitted At: 4:05pm 01-24-22
Once again, blame lawful gun owners for gun violence and tax them?!?!? This is a scam by the city to just make money. None of the funds collected from this tax will reduce gun violence, nor protect your citizens, and you know it!! what part of logic escapes people who blame the pencil for making mistakes?? William Jones
Location: 91107, Pasadena
Submitted At: 3:54pm 01-24-22
This ordinance will have far reaching negative implications across the State of California. Taxes impact low and moderate income families the most. Denying, or even taxing, the Constitutional right of the public to protect themselves and their families is the worst form of government on the planet. San Jose is not progressive, it is showing its true colors, a repressive form of government that does not values the rights of its citizens.
BayArea Resident
Location:
Submitted At: 3:47pm 01-24-22
I oppose the Public Safety Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance. This ordinance does nothing to prevent gun violence.
This ordinance will make it harder for members of poorer communities to protect themselves with a firearm by making it more expensive for them to legally own a firearm. This ordinance will only allow criminals to commit more crimes because they know their victims are disarmed. I will never travel to San Jose or do business with any business in San Jose if this ordinance passes.
Mile Kili
Location:
Submitted At: 3:40pm 01-24-22
https://www.goodreads.com/story/show/1738811-24-7
Adam McGary
Location: 92626-3106, COSTA MESA
Submitted At: 3:38pm 01-24-22
This is a horrible ordinance intended to punish law-abiding gun owners. There is no logical connection between the cost of illegal gun violence and law-abiding gun owners.
Todd Bradford
Location: 95132, SAN JOSE
Submitted At: 3:36pm 01-24-22
Councilmembers you need to oppose this misguided action. It will do nothing to reduce crime as criminals will not pay these fees, it has already been noted that it will be challenged in court as it is unconstitutional Dow Cross
Location: 93455, Orcutt
Submitted At: 3:24pm 01-24-22
I oppose your plan on taxing gun owners because of gun crime in the San Jose area. This will do nothing to stop criminals but only burden law biding firearms owners.
Daniel Mattera
Location: 95127, San Jose
Submitted At: 3:22pm 01-24-22
Please oppose any taxation of gun owners. This type of symbolic/useless legislation does nothing to fight crime.
It only penalizes the law abiding. Do you think criminals will line up to pay this ridiculous tax? Stephen Halcum
Location: 92683, Westminster
Submitted At: 3:14pm 01-24-22
I understand you are considering charging fees (taxes) on persons that legally own firearms. I would definitely oppose this. It would have zero effect on illegal behavior. Please reconsider.
Steven Miller
Location: 93111-2614, Santa Barbara
Submitted At: 3:11pm 01-24-22
Charging fees for constitutional rights is illegal and will not stand up to legal scrutiny. The arguments comparing fees for motor vehicle insurance are fallacious as driving an automobile is a privilege, not a right. Elections matter, as the city council will soon find out.
SanJose Resident
Location:
Submitted At: 3:07pm 01-24-22
As a resident of SJ who works with the local law enforcement. In my experience, a great deal of the guns seized from criminals are unregistered "ghost guns". This ordinance will do nothing to stop the gun violence as criminals will continue to buy incomplete unregistered 80% guns and complete them to commit their crimes with. This ordinance does nothing but punish law-abiding gun owners. Law-abiding citizens and responsible gun owners should not be required to pay for crimes committed by others.
Ross Spielman
Location: 92805, Anaheim
Submitted At: 2:57pm 01-24-22
Stop the non- common sense action.
Sean Hart
Location: 95117, San Jose
Submitted At: 2:56pm 01-24-22
I strongly oppose this new ordinance. It unlawfully attacks lawful gun owners and creates an unfair tax and fees. It will not reduce gun violence or crime and will cost tax payers millions of dollars in litigation if it passes.
Scott Boyle
Location: 93291, Visalia
Submitted At: 2:42pm 01-24-22
Are you going to tax my use of this public comment page? If you're going to tax the second amendment, it seems only logical that your next step will be to tax the first amendment. This will do nothing to improve safety since only law-abiding citizens will be affected and you're adding another barrier to low-income law-abiding citizens to be able to protect themselves through lawful gun ownership under the second amendment. "Pay to play" is not how the Bill of Rights works. Y ou should be ashamed.
Dion Monge
Location:
Submitted At: 2:29pm 01-24-22
This taxation proposal is purely reactionary to the unfortunate shooting that happened last year. It is in no way “common sense” as it taxes people’s rights. It also prices out lower income families from protecting themselves and their families. This proposal is the most ridiculous anti civil rights and constitutional infringement I’ve seen in a while. This is shameful and the city of San Jose should be ashamed of themselves for even proposing it.
Nicholas AK
Location: 95161, San Jose
Submitted At: 2:24pm 01-24-22
I am in complete opposition to this. If this ordinance is passed what stops us having similar ordinances requiring specific religious groups from being required to pay a safety tax because their members are part of an extremist view that wishes harm on non-believers.
If the ordinance cared about costs and public safety they should instead implement a large fine + civil damages going after the assets of violent criminals for restitution (irrespective of how they commit their violent crime) Kerry Standifer
Location: 92120, San Diego
Submitted At: 2:15pm 01-24-22
I am sorry, but seriously, are the inmates running the asylum? The right to own arms is essential, codified in Common Law and so important the framers placed that right in an Amendment to the US Constitution. Y ou cannot tax a right. Y ou cannot demand insurance to exercise a right. Y ou are wasting taxpayers' money on a ludicrous ordinance that will be shot down in Federal courts, never mind violation of state pre-emption.
Joseph Amaro
Location: 94583-1667, San Ramon
Submitted At: 2:03pm 01-24-22
Unconstitutional Taxation of law abiding citizens will never be justified.
Rick Kimble
Location:
Submitted At: 2:01pm 01-24-22
I am in opposition to your ridiculous proposal. Like most of the anti-gun laws in California, this will do nothing to promote gun safety and there will be little to no compliance. I suggest you enforce laws against illegal gun owners and gangs. Stop targeting law abiding gun owners with illogical regulations. TAKING GUNS AWAY AND/OR RESTRICTING GUNS DOESN’T MAKE IT SAFER AGAINST BAD PEOPLE, IT ONL Y MAKES IT SAFER FOR BAD PEOPLE.
Mark Lee
Location: 95822, Sacramento
Submitted At: 2:01pm 01-24-22
Y our proposed anti firearms ordinance is a disgrace. Preemption laws in California try to make regulations (however restrictive) standardized throughout California. Y our proposed law fly's in the face of that concept.
Lock up your criminals and gun violence will be eliminated! Do not place the burden of complying with new ordinances on law abiding citizens while criminal will continue to do as they please.
ML
Vito Giotta
Location: 93277, Visalia
Submitted At: 1:59pm 01-24-22
Y our anti 2nd Amendment Ordnance shows your disregard of our U.S. Constitution. Y our rational is ludicrous on its face, as having liability insurance to reduce the death rate has no bases in any research done by any reliable unbiased groups. Y our required city gun fee is a TAX and it must go through a ballot initiative and passed by the citizens. This city tax (fee) is an INFRINGEMENT as is the insurance requirement and is very much racist towards minorities and low income.
Alexander Antonov
Location: San Jose
Submitted At: 1:58pm 01-24-22
Stop punishing legal gun owners with taxes and regulations. Crack down illegal gun ownership and gun violence instead. People elect you to serve the communities not to pushes them.
Christopher Masten
Location: 95125, San Jose
Submitted At: 1:35pm 01-24-22
I am in opposition to your blatant anti-gun ordinance. The idea that you should ask to pay a fee for exercising my 2nd amendment rights is plain unamerican. What is next, asking me to pay a fee to exercise my 1st amendment rights? While I am in favor of removing illegal guns from the streets and reducing gun violence, targeting law abiding citizens will not accomplish this. I suggest that you increase law enforcement of street gangs and illegal behavior,
George Edwards
Location:
Submitted At: 1:33pm 01-24-22
I suggest you read the article in the latest TIME magazine related to the current gun problem. The author discusses how the issue has been successfully dealt with in certain other cities with larger problems than we are experiencing locally. He states that the issues are centralized within areas of the cities. He refers to an Oakland CA approach which was successful. Punishing responsible recreational users of firearms doesn't solve a problem caused by criminals and crazies.
Robin Steal
Location: 90048, LA
Submitted At: 1:31pm 01-24-22
Law and Constitution abiding citizens(unlike yourselves) are not the problem and a tax for being law abiding shows what you are. The problem promoting violence.
Al Taylor
Location: 93536, lancaster
Submitted At: 1:31pm 01-24-22
Dear Sir: I am opposed to the possibility of firearm owners being taxed because first it could be abused for future issues that have nothing to do with firearms and second legal law abiding owners have nothing to do with those who break the law. If you wish to act consider passing laws beyond state laws that imprison and/or fine those who posses or control firearms when they are prohibited from doing so.
Rosemarie Bauer
Location: 93711, FRESNO
Submitted At: 1:29pm 01-24-22
Data shows that while violent crime soared in 2020, violent crime with guns fell dramatically by 27% Guns are NOT the problem. Bad guys with stolen guns ARE the problem.
Use General Fund money (not new taxes on gun owners) to pay law enforcement to protect people and have them enforce existing laws!!
Travis Murphy
Location: 95119, San Jose
Submitted At: 1:22pm 01-24-22
This ordinance will do nothing to stop gun violence as criminals will continue to use unregistered or otherwise illegal guns to commit their crimes unabated. Meanwhile, law-abiding gun owners in our city will suffer nothing more than blatant financial harassment.
Why should the innocent pay for the crimes of the guilty? Why should a city that claims to care about equality place taxes & fees on its citizens for using their constitutional rights? Do only the wealthy deserve them?
Please vote NO!
Patrick Geary
Location: 95125, San Jose
Submitted At: 1:21pm 01-24-22
This proposed ordinance is going to target the poor of San Jose for the most part.
The method whereby you are not hunting down people on the CA DOJ's firearm registry and instead only targeting processing whether or not they've got their papers in order from tickets and/or arrests; is only going to target minorities in San Jose.
That's not even stepping on the constitutional issues; which this is filled with. The state and city will get sued into oblivion for this, by me, if need be.
Joe Silva
Location: 93292, Visalia
Submitted At: 1:02pm 01-24-22
Y ou need to go after the criminals not law abiding citizens. This is evil work of Satan so stop it now! In Jesus Name.
Chad Roue
Location: 95129, San jose
Submitted At: 1:00pm 01-24-22
This is pure virtue signaling on the part of politicians. This will not even address their stated goals and when the city inevitably loses the lawsuit against this inconstititional taxing of an enumerated right - they will likely have to pay the other sides legal fees as well. This is a waste of time and money when the city has bigger issues like homelessness to address.
Robert Patterson
Location:
Submitted At: 12:55pm 01-24-22
An impediment to the exercise of constitutional rights is unconstitutional on its face. Well documented case law in this regard. This is pure and simple a Gavin style gun grab, abs you should all be recalled for even considering such a thing.
Russell Bryant
Location: 92102, San Diego
Submitted At: 12:49pm 01-24-22
Legal, law abiding, and registered gun owners should not have to fund the cities’ war against gun ownership.
Enforce the laws already on the books, and prosecute those found guilty.
Elroy Harrington
Location: 95678, Roseville
Submitted At: 12:45pm 01-24-22
The contents of this ordinance unfairly infringe on residents' second amendment rights.
The exceptions in this ordinance, specifically exempting peace officers, retired peace officers, concealed weapon holders, and other persons associated with lower income or disabilities. We do not exempt these persons from vehicle liability insurance requirements. Why are they exempted here from this insurance requirement? The impound clause lacks any due process, pre or post seizure.
Edward Boca
Location: 91342, Sylmar
Submitted At: 12:43pm 01-24-22
Please vote NO on any and all gun control bills.
John Pal
Location:
Submitted At: 12:43pm 01-24-22
This will not stop crime. This an illegal taxation on legal gun owners and must not pass.
Larry Malukas
Location: 90740, SEAL BEACH
Submitted At: 12:43pm 01-24-22
Oppose Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance does nothing to stop crime. Why not change the name to We want to outlaw all firearms not controlled by us.
Deby Goodman
Location: 92886, Y orba Linda
Submitted At: 12:37pm 01-24-22
As elected officials, it is your sworn duty to uphold and protect the Constitution, including all its amendments.
This proposal is blatantly unconstitutional. Therefore it is your sworn duty to turn it down.
Ian McMillan
Location: 92673, San Clemente
Submitted At: 12:36pm 01-24-22
ANNUAL GUN HARM REDUCTION FEE: stop the nonsensical and unconstitutional tax on law abiding gun owners. It's just a money grab and an outrageous tax on those that cannot afford it.
Steve Papenfus
Location: 94523, Pleasant Hill
Submitted At: 12:28pm 01-24-22
unconstitutional, idiotic, unnecessary,
John kaczmarek
Location: 91326, Northridge
Submitted At: 12:28pm 01-24-22
This will do nothing to prevent future attack's, what if the perp lives out side your city and comes in to their work place in the city..?? Once again burdening honest tax paying citizens just for their right to own a firearm. Hope you don't go bankrupt fighting this, cause you are going to court!! Wally Boggess
Location: 93021, Moorpark
Submitted At: 12:19pm 01-24-22
Legal, law abiding, and registered gun owners should not have to fund the cities’ war against gun ownership.
Enforce the laws already on the books, and prosecute those found guilty.
Howard Chang
Location:
Submitted At: 12:11pm 01-24-22
As a resident, I OPPOSE the Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance. As an owner of a few firearms since the spike in crime from 2020, I learned the hard way of how ridiculous gun control laws have become in California. A law abiding citizen has so many hoops to jump and fees to pay, yet criminals don't do. The Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance, which is a misnomer, does not reduce gun harm or crime. All it does is tax residents that legally own firearms, usually not used for the purpose of committing a crime.
Larry Lewis
Location: 95051, SANTA CLARA
Submitted At: 12:08pm 01-24-22
This is a bad idea. Harass the innocent
Charlie Fleischmann
Location: 94518, Concord
Submitted At: 12:08pm 01-24-22
This is only harming law abiding citizens. Why should those that follow all the rules be the ones that have to pay for those that don't? Put your efforts into getting the ghost guns off the street.
Jeffrey Muth
Location: 93023, Ojai
Submitted At: 12:07pm 01-24-22
Hello,
I am writing you to let you know that I oppose the Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance that you are proposing.
It is an unconstitutional attack on lawful gun owners and does not affect criminals.
Thank Y ou,
Jeff Muth
William Like
Location: 94581, Vallejo
Submitted At: 12:06pm 01-24-22
Oppose Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance does nothing to stop crime.
Jeff Turner
Location:
Submitted At: 12:04pm 01-24-22
I am writing to oppose the Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance. The Ordinance is a penalty to law abiding citizens that of guilty of nothing except owning a firearm. This is clearing a discriminatory drafting Ordinance that will clearly not withstand a legal challenge. If fact by passing this Ordinance the Council is placing the City of San Jose at risk of paying opposing legal fees. This fee will in no way reduce crime.
Susan Webb
Location: 95121, San Jose
Submitted At: 12:00pm 01-24-22
2nd amendment violation
Tiffany Cheuvront
Location: 92802, Long Beach
Submitted At: 11:58am 01-24-22
My name is Tiffany Cheuvront, and I California Rifle & Pistol Association. This is not the first time that we have commented on the proposed ordinance to require lawful gun owners to either pay affine for exercising their rights or purchase mandatory insurance. CRPA stands in opposition to the Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance.
Additional Comments were submitted to the City Clerk.
John Fagan
Location: 95125, San Jose
Submitted At: 11:55am 01-24-22
Y ou guys are blatantly violating the 2nd amendment. Y ou may get away with it in the short term but definitely not in the long term so why waste everyone's time?
DANIEL AZEVEDO
Location: 95917-9707, BIGGS
Submitted At: 11:55am 01-24-22
Putting any more restrictions or controls on good tax paying citizens is not going to help your/our crime or shooting issues. The people in charge of government need to understand and see good citizens are not the problem its the criminals and as far as I can see they have no punishment what so ever. Please quit punishing the good people of this God forsaken state and do the right thing.
James Hull
Location: 95111
Submitted At: 11:54am 01-24-22
Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance
In Heller vs DC, the SCOTUS held that "Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to possess firearms independent of service in a state militia". So the conversation on if gun ownership is an individual right, is in fact over. What this ordinance actually does, is force individuals to PAY for a constitutionally protected right. Law biding yet lower income individuals will have to give up that right, thus making the ordinance RACIST and CLASSIST.
Joe Kroening
Location: 91214, La Crescenta
Submitted At: 11:53am 01-24-22
THIS IS NOT NEEDED. FOLLOW & ENFORCE THE RULES/LAWS PRESENTL Y IN FORCE IN A TIMEL Y MANNER SO THAT MORE NEEDLESS REGULATION IS NOT REQUIRED.
Phil Hearn
Location: 95377, Tracy
Submitted At: 11:49am 01-24-22
Y ou know and I know this will do nothing to stop or reduce gun violence. It will only pad your pockets and put even more burden and restrictions on honest law abiding citizens. When are you going to actually start going after criminals as hard as you go after law abiding people. This type of discrimination has to stop. We are all tired of and won't stand for it anymore.
David Hayes
Location: 92646, Huntington Beach
Submitted At: 11:49am 01-24-22
This Ordinance will not stop any crime, the guns that are legally owned have a very small chance of being involved in crime, It is the criminals that will not pay your insurance, (tax) and the criminals that will use guns to break the law, not the law abiding citizens that you are trying to punish.
Please get hold of yourselves and read the second amendent to the constitution.
David Hayes
Location: 92646, Huntington Beach
Submitted At: 11:49am 01-24-22
This Ordinance will not stop any crime, the guns that are legally owned have a very small chance of being involved in crime, It is the criminals that will not pay your insurance, (tax) and the criminals that will use guns to break the law, not the law abiding citizens that you are trying to punish.
Please get hold of yourselves and read the second amendent to the constitution.
Steven Falconer
Location:
Submitted At: 11:46am 01-24-22
I oppose this measure and believe that this is a way to penalize people with differing views and prevents law abiding individuals from protecting themselves without paying undo costs that are not aligned with providing protection these people need. This ordinance will not decrease crime or have any beneficial impact on crime.
Jim Dodge
Location: 95051, Santa Clara
Submitted At: 11:46am 01-24-22
San Jose is continuing to push new laws that do not address the problems that they say are being addressed.
Criminals do not care about any of these laws and will not follow them. Only law abiding citizens are being stopped from exorcising the rights given us under the second amendment of the US Constitution. Why should criminals pay attention to these laws when they are not prosecuted and held accountable by our elected officials.
Catch and release is only effective when fishing.
Bryan C
Location:
Submitted At: 11:38am 01-24-22
I oppose the gun ordinance. The guns I own did not cause the crime rate, I purchased them because of the crime rate. Turn on the news, walk through our crumbling neighborhoods. Government failure is on full display. We know it is you who continues to fail us. Taxing us for owning a gun we had to buy because of your own failure is the worst kind of Kafkaesque policy making.
Police the streets. Lock up the criminals. That’s your mandate as a public servant. And withdraw this proposed ordinance.
James Wolf
Location: 92117, San Diego
Submitted At: 11:36am 01-24-22
Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance
This ordinance will not reduce any crime as you well know. It will not reduce violence at all. It will just put a heavier burden on law abiding Californians. And why would law enforcement people be excluded? This ordinance is a blatant attack on our 2nd Amendment and just more heavy handed attempts to see "the people" do not have any power to be a deterrent to draconian government control. Do not approve this ordinance.
Ken Rountree
Location:
Submitted At: 11:35am 01-24-22
I strongly oppose the proposed ordinance to tax and require insurance on lawful gun owners. It is unconstitutional to tax an enumerated constitutional right and no other right requires insurance. This is misguided and does not even address the real problem cities are facing - gang and illegal drug activity. I suggest you invest your time and energy into finding the root causes of these issues and develop appropriate solutions instead of attacking the law abiding citizens.
Respectfully.
Ryan Shores
Location: 92626, Costa Mesa
Submitted At: 11:34am 01-24-22
Charging people to access fundamental Constitutional rights is specifically designed to deny rights to the poor and people of color. This is no different than a poll tax.
Eric Barloewen
Location: 95118, San Jose
Submitted At: 11:29am 01-24-22
This ordinance is not fair to law abiding gun owners. The vast majority of all gun related crime is done by individuals who are already prohibited from owning firearms and will not pay for insurance. 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. Fine the convicted criminals who use guns illegally! Have our city be tough on crime for once. Respectfully submitted.
Colion Noir
Location:
Submitted At: 11:28am 01-24-22
Stop shutting down the comments and our 1A rights to oppose this. Last time I checked, there were over 1,000 comments opposing this ordiance.
This only harms lawful gun owners and does nothing to protect city residents against crime. Criminals never have nor will comply with any laws or taxes. Punish the criminals, not your law-abiding residents.
Keep the comment section open for all the see the massive opposition to this! Hugh Cruickshank
Location: 94930, Fairfax
Submitted At: 11:27am 01-24-22
To whom it may concern,
I want to voice my strong opposition to the supposed Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance that seeks to punish responsible gun owners for the actions of criminals. Not only is this ordinance unconstitutional, but its an egregious overreach by government.
Please vote this abominable ordinance down and enforce the existing laws on the books.
Respectfully, Hugh Cruickshank
CRPA volunteer lead.
Craig Krstolic
Location: 95121, San Jose
Submitted At: 11:26am 01-24-22
The ordinance is a violation of court rulings against Jim Crow laws that tax constitutional rights.
The city will be sued by numerous organizations and suffer financially.
Gun owners can't comply with the ordinance. The required insurance policies don't exist.
The proposal implements taxes at the local level, in violation of the California Constitution on special taxes, Article XIII C Section 2(d)
The city should enforce current laws and rebuild SJPD to enforce.
Dan Oliver
Location: 95129, San Jose
Submitted At: 11:26am 01-24-22
The only way to reduce "gun crime" is to put criminals in jail not make law abiding gun owners into criminals by passing unconstitutional gun control laws. It's the criminals, not the guns! Harriet Tateyama
Location: 90505, 2609 West 233rd Street
Submitted At: 11:25am 01-24-22
Respect the 2nd amendment of the US Constitution!
Punish criminals, not law-abiding taxpayers.
Stephen Hipsak
Location: 92587, Canyon Lake
Submitted At: 11:25am 01-24-22
Please reconsider this proposal before voting. Punish the "bad" guys with laws that are now on the books. Not the honest, responsible gun owners who legally own self defense arms. Thank you for your consideration to this matter.
Steve Hipsak
Bruce Cowles
Location:
Submitted At: 11:25am 01-24-22
Please enforce the existing laws. It's already illegal to use weapons to assault or kill others. Punish criminals, not law abiding citizens. Criminals will not pay this tax/insurance nor will they turn in their guns. This ordinance will harm law abiding citizens and do nothing to prevent crime. In fact, when the criminals start to realize that less law abiding citizens have guns, they will prey more easily upon them. Response time for Law Enforcement is not sufficient protection for my family
Stephen Dieves
Location: 95987, Williams
Submitted At: 11:22am 01-24-22
#1, I am an American citizen. #2, I am a CRPA member. #3, I am a registered voter in Mexifornia. I disagree with your anti responsible gun ownership/usage here in Mexifornia. Please focus your attention on more constructive issues in your town/hood.
Alex Tary
Location: 96002, Redding
Submitted At: 11:21am 01-24-22
Gun crimes are committed by criminals and you are trying to tax the legal gun owners. It is somewhat like trying to fine a sober driver who gets run into by a drunken driver. The Second Amendment states that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. Y ou are trying to tax a right guaranteed by the Constitution thus infringing on that right.
David L
Location: 95131, San Jose
Submitted At: 11:20am 01-24-22
As a resident of San Jose, I strongly oppose this ordinance. I fail to see how this will ever work to solve the gun crimes by taxing the law abiding citizens !! Why can't you tax or punish the criminals ? And why can't they buy their own liability insurance ? Is this discrimination ? Matt Dutton
Location:
Submitted At: 11:20am 01-24-22
San Jose is violating the Constitution. The problem you have is called criminals. Y ou need to put them in jail so they don't terrorize society. All you're doing with your so-called gun laws is restricting law-abiding citizens to have firearms -- which by the way are increasingly more important because liberals like you are refusing to put criminals in jail!
Mario Olguin
Location: 90262, L YNWOOD
Submitted At: 11:18am 01-24-22
Y ou are punishing the law abiding citizens, totally WRONG! Tim Stewart
Location: 93306, Bakersfield
Submitted At: 11:17am 01-24-22
Stop the madness.
Respect the constitution
David Desiderio
Location: 94501, Alameda
Submitted At: 11:16am 01-24-22
Y ou do realize that criminals do not have to comply with any of these schemes because they don't register guns and do not have to. They do not have to incriminate themselves. See Haynes v United States (1968).
Only the innocent citizen is punished by this nonsense.
Virgil Hane
Location: 92501, Riverside
Submitted At: 11:15am 01-24-22
we are watching
Mike Worrell
Location: 95136, San Jose
Submitted At: 11:15am 01-24-22
Illigal
Sierra Nevada
Location: 92337, Fontana
Submitted At: 11:15am 01-24-22
This is nothing more than a tax on law abiding citizens and is completely wrong. There is no reason that citizens who legally obtain guns should be punished for the actions of criminals. I do believe this is way to create a gun registry and I oppose this action. I demand that you leave our 2nd amendment rights alone. Punish criminals not law abiding citizens
Todd Miller
Location:
Submitted At: 11:13am 01-24-22
This ordinance will not reduce “gun harm”. It is poorly thought out, discriminates the poor and law-abiding gun owners, bolsters illegal gun trade, bifurcates the public into rival political groups, and contravenes the Second Amendment in the Constitution of the United States of America.
The City needs to focus on the cause of gun violence. Reducing the number of legally owned guns does not take guns away from criminals. Stop following this pattern and come up with something better.
Thomas LaVelle
Location: 91001, ALTADENA
Submitted At: 11:12am 01-24-22
Gun tax!! Tax the criminals. Try it it will work. Anyone convicted of a crime must pay a tax penalty.
LeRoy Marvin
Location: 95112, San Jose
Submitted At: 11:12am 01-24-22
I am not surprised by this ordinance or the methods used to suppress my opinion. As a senior citizen I have seen this city council do nothing for me. Of course I own some guns, many that are older than me, really a threat.
William Gilbert
Location:
Submitted At: 11:12am 01-24-22
Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance: A consequence of this ordinance is a chilling effect on those who are economically disadvantaged. They will be hindered by additional cost from keeping a firearm for the security of themselves or their family. There are already considerable costs and paperwork involved in doing so. Increasing the difficulty of compliance leads to non-compliance. Such laws only affect law abiding citizens, the people who ought to be free to choose how to defend themselves.
Robert Mead
Location:
Submitted At: 11:10am 01-24-22
REDUCTION OF GUN HARM – LIABILITY INSURANCE REQUIREMENT AND GUN
HARM REDUCTION FEE
Impoundment for non-compliance with insurance requirement? That is simply seizure of property guaranteed possession under the second amendment; unlike cars which are not protected by the 2nd amendment. Pretty slippery slope here. This type of thinking would justify seizure of any property - your house, any sporting goods , kitchen goods, tools - by requiring additional specific insurance. Vague and Arbitrary Samuel Peters
Location: 93950-4260, Pacific Grove
Submitted At: 11:10am 01-24-22
Please stop spending tax payer's dollars and time on ridiculous notions like this. Law abiding citizens are not at fault for owning firearms. Criminals are responsible for committing crimes. Don't charge us for the actions of others!
Jann Kurrasch
Location: 90808, Long Beach
Submitted At: 11:09am 01-24-22
This is nothing but a back door to try to confiscate the guns of law-abiding gun owners. They are not the problem! How many illegal gun owners will have insurance? How many of them will have their firearms confiscated? Y ou would do better to enforce the current laws on the books and arrest -- and jail -- probation violators and gang members who have firearms illegally.
Charles Warren
Location: 29803, Aiken
Submitted At: 11:07am 01-24-22
How about enforcing existing laws? Y ou can, alternatively, penalize otherwise law abiding citizens... and give them yet another incentive to leave. https://www.bizpacreview.com/2022/01/08/people-cant-escape-california-fast- enough-but-u-haul-is-struggling-to-keep-up-1186077/
George Ybanez
Location: 95624, Elk Grove
Submitted At: 11:06am 01-24-22
Y ou can't put a tax or a fee or require insurance on a right. Y ou don't charge a fee or tax or require insurance for freedom of speach. Once again wasting tax payers monies instead of going after actual criminals who break the law.
Randy Seaman
Location: 96075, paynes creek
Submitted At: 11:06am 01-24-22
This is an unconstitutional ordinance and will not stop any gun violence. Bad folks that want to do harm will do so outside of the law. Making more laws and harming the general public by denial of their second amendment rights is not the way to controlling gun violence. Carrying of concealed weapons by the good folks can curb the risk of innocent people being harmed. Background checks for those good folks who wish to protect themselves and others is neccessary
Henry Chang
Location: 95148, San Jose
Submitted At: 11:06am 01-24-22
I strongly OPPOSE the Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance. It will make San Jose a more unsafe place, and does nothing but tax the legal firearm owners, with no consequences to actual criminals. As a law abiding resident, please do not pass this.
Kevin Cummins
Location: 92886, Y orba Linda
Submitted At: 11:05am 01-24-22
I oppose this ordinance, and the secret and manipulative way it and this meeting are being handled. Y ou are not dictators, but are elecected officials who are supposed to do the will of the the majority. Professing yourselves wise you have now become foolish, and a poisoner of freedom.
Kirk McClelland
Location: 95126, San Jose
Submitted At: 11:05am 01-24-22
There are no words to express how much I am opposed to this action. To tax select lawful people to cover the cost of unlawful people is reckless. If the city wants to cover the cost of unlawful people, citizens of the United States or foreign nationals, then the population as a whole should be taxed. A select group of lawful people, citizens of the United States or foreign nationals, are not the cause of the unlawful acts of others.
Barry Bauer
Location: 93710, Fresno
Submitted At: 11:04am 01-24-22
More firearm taxes infringes on the people's right to keep and bear arms. Catch the bad guys that are using stolen firearms and leave the good guys alone. The good guys are background checked and use firearms for self defense, hunting and recreation.
Andy Cervantes
Location: 90240, Downey
Submitted At: 11:03am 01-24-22
The San Jose city counsel has let their constituents down by proposing more regulations that may hinder the populace. And with these ordnances in proposal, many low-income residencies who wish to arm themselves in defense and live within the city's district will be severely impacted by these potential mandates.
If these proposals proceed and become set-in-stone, we the people will speak with our voices and our votes in the next city council election and replace you from those positions.
Ethan Savatis
Location: 95148, San Jose
Submitted At: 11:01am 01-24-22
Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105 (1943) A State may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution. P . 319 U. S. 113
MICHAEL WORSTELL
Location: 91362-1903, Thousand Oaks
Submitted At: 11:01am 01-24-22
Please OPPOSE any and all laws, one of course, is the GUN HARM REDUCTION ORDINANCE. This ORDANCE WILL NOT REDUCE CRIME; adds extra cost to legal gun owners; might be very well unconstitutional; and will not improve public safety. Thank you.
Richard Bunett
Location: 92376, Rialto
Submitted At: 11:00am 01-24-22
Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance
WE oppose this ordinance AND the prevention from Public Comment on the subject.Everyone must be allowed to voice their opinion, no matter the perspective.
Resident SanJose
Location: 95034, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:59am 01-24-22
strongly OPPOSE the Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance.
I've been a resident of San Jose for 26 years.
I oppose the Gun Harm Reduction bill. It will make San Jose an even more unsafe place.
This proposed legislation is misguided and does nothing to address the use of illegal firearms.
Now the SJ lawmakers want to to tax people out of their natural right to defend themselves.
Punish the criminals, not law abiding citizens who pay taxes to pay your salaries.
Y ou work for us City Council. Remember that
Dennis Barrett
Location: 95954, Magalia
Submitted At: 10:58am 01-24-22
I am a former resident of San Jose and still a resident of California.
I am strongly opposed to this proposal!
The Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance does absolutely nothing to deter criminals or criminal activity. This is a punitive measure designed only to impact law abiding citizens only. Criminals do not buy guns and will not be paying this gun harm reduction fee.
This is plainly an assault on law abiding gun owners. Try going after the criminals instead, for a change.
Vote NO on the ordinance.
Scott Mackey
Location: 95130, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:58am 01-24-22
I appose the Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance as it's title is deceitful and it's aim is to deny citizens of their right to self defense. As this is a continuing effort by the city counsel has tried to pass this type of legislation the legislators will be held accountable at the ballot box.
Thomas Dahms
Location: 92860, Norco
Submitted At: 10:58am 01-24-22
This will do nothing to stop gun violence.
Julia Grasso
Location: 90290, Topanga
Submitted At: 10:56am 01-24-22
Do impose an insurance requirements upon law abiding citizens. Focus your intention and our tax dollars on criminals. This will be challenged in court straight away, being another waste of taxpayer dollars.
David Kempken
Location:
Submitted At: 10:54am 01-24-22
Taxing guns and gun owners will do NOTHING to reduce crime and is unconstitutional.
J R
Location:
Submitted At: 10:54am 01-24-22
I oppose any attempt to infringe on my second amendment rights.
David Branson
Location: 93555, Ridgecrest
Submitted At: 10:53am 01-24-22
Please do not tax the law abiding citizen for having firearms. If you want to prevent gun violence, put the criminals away and keep them in jail. Do not make it harder for low income people to have firearm for self defense.
Tom Bruce
Location: 94108, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:51am 01-24-22
do NOT tax-attack legal gun owners.. I will not comply
Chris Harrington
Location:
Submitted At: 10:50am 01-24-22
The Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance will do nothing to reduce firearm injuries or deaths. It is simply a way for the government to put more and more burdens on law abiding citizens exercising their constitutional rights.
Joseph Hickman
Location: 95130, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:50am 01-24-22
In 2020 Californians purchased a record number of firearms, 1,166,836 to be exact. We also had a record number of first time gun owners. 2020 was also a year where the face of new gun owners changed dramatically with 48% new owners being women, 34% being white, 24% hispanic, 23% being black and 19% being asian. I am a life long Democrat and please let Sam know that the party is on a collision course with the 2nd Amendment among its own party members, aside from the rest of the country.
Nicholas Maris
Location: 94587, Union City
Submitted At: 10:50am 01-24-22
The Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance does NOTHING to deter criminals. It is just an ill-disguised attempt to punish lawful firearms owners in an attempt to deter citizens from their 2A rights. AND, a way for the city to make a few $$ from it as well. Disgusting.
Mark Cockeram
Location: 93063, Simi Valley
Submitted At: 10:50am 01-24-22
Although I am not a resident of San Jose, I am a resident of California. I strongly oppose this so-called “gun harm reduction ordinance”, as this does nothing to help solve criminal violence and only targets legal gun owners. This ordinance would be another violation of the Second Amendment of the US Constitution. Try concentrating on enforcing the existing laws and stop trying to come up with ridiculous solutions that would have no effect on the issues at hand.
Josh Bligh
Location: 95051, Santa Clara
Submitted At: 10:49am 01-24-22
I oppose forcing law abiding gun owners, your non-problem citizens, to purchase a mythical insurance product and/or the City of San Jose making those same people criminals with the stroke of a pen. Please focus on the causes of crime in the City rather than creating a new genre of criminal. Thank you.
Guy Bouck
Location: 91763, Montclair
Submitted At: 10:49am 01-24-22
I'm not a resident of San Jose but I urge the San Jose City Counsel to oppose the Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance
Brandon Creel
Location:
Submitted At: 10:49am 01-24-22
I respectfully urge to you to vote NO to these misguided ordinances, which will not improve public safety, and which will disproportionately impact low-income individuals.
Chuck Goetter
Location: 91362, Thousand Oaks
Submitted At: 10:46am 01-24-22
Anti US Constitution, despicable conduct for any US citizen not to mention an elected public official. Nothing new though the dems are DISHONEST from the git go and they think they know everything.
TERRY TAPPAN
Location: 96002, Redding
Submitted At: 10:46am 01-24-22
This is the most ridiculous effort to punish law-abiding people who cherish their 2nd Amendment RIGHT to have firearms to protect themselves. All of these feel good efforts are distraction from having to deal with the reality of the very difficult problem of mitigating violent behavior like arresting and putting the criminals in jail for a long time, dismantling gangs etc.
Can anyone proposing this to explain how this ordinance would reduce "Gun Harm"? Stephen Lundgren
Location: 95355, Modesto
Submitted At: 10:43am 01-24-22
Please do not impose this odious ordinance
William Quon
Location: 90720, Rossmoor
Submitted At: 10:43am 01-24-22
Please do not tax the law abiding citizen for having firearms. If you want to prevent gun violence, put the criminals away and keep them in jail. Do not make it harder for low income people to have firearm for self defense.
Ray Brant
Location: 94528, Diablo
Submitted At: 10:43am 01-24-22
Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance
This proposed ordinance is nothing more than a tax revenue tool. It is time to look at yourself in the mirror and have the City live with in its means.
If you are not stopping crime then why punish your law abiding citizens.
William O'Malley
Location: 95121, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:42am 01-24-22
Hello Mayor and Councilmembers, Please table or vote no on agenda item 4. None of the agenda recitals mention specific issues in the city of San Jose that will be addressed by this ordinance and most reference very outdated facts and figures. While I appreciate your attempt to protect the residents that you serve, this ordinance, like many, will penalize the law abiding residents of San Jose and have essentially no impact on those most responsible for firearms related problems. Thank Y ou
Richard Capiola
Location: 92646, HUNTINGTON BEACH
Submitted At: 10:42am 01-24-22
This is the most ridiculous effort to punish law abiding people who cherish their 2nd Amendment RIGHT to have firearms to protect themselves. All of these feel good efforts are distraction from having to deal with the reality of the the very difficult problem of mitigating violent behavior. Y ou know things like arresting and putting the criminals in jail for a long time, dismantling gangs etc.
Can anyone proposing this to explain how this ordinance would reduce "Gun Harm"? Jonathan Mackenzie
Location: 94043, Mountain View
Submitted At: 10:41am 01-24-22
I strongly oppose this proposal and will be looking very carefully at the voting results. This proposed legislation is misguided and does nothing to address the use of illegal firearms. It pretends to solve a problem that does not exist. It will waste the funds of the city and be struck down. Please consider the many, many ways we can improve our social situation besides wasteful proposals backed by big money from back East.
Tim Craig
Location: 95132
Submitted At: 10:41am 01-24-22
I've been a resident of San Jose for 20 years. I oppose the Gun Harm Reduction bill. It is not only unconstitutional but will also make San Jose an even unsafer places. San Jose has been cutting the police budget constantly over the last 20 years which caused the City to go from "Safest Large City in the Country" to a city with regular gang shootings/stabbings and constant burglaries. Now the SJ lawmakers want to to tax people out of their natural right to defend themselves.
Daniel Orr
Location: 90601, Whittier
Submitted At: 10:41am 01-24-22
Dear City of SJ: Every Single time such restrictive laws are codified, crime, including homicide, increases. Check out the cities of San Francisco, Los Angeles, New Y ork, Chicago, etc. Disarming law-abiding citizens only empowers the criminals. This really isn't that hard to understand.
Thank you
Jack Hawley
Location: 92120, San Diego
Submitted At: 10:40am 01-24-22
Gun Harm Ordinance
Andre Bertauche
Location: 95448, Healdsburg
Submitted At: 10:40am 01-24-22
stop interfering with the second amendment
Richard Montanez
Location:
Submitted At: 10:39am 01-24-22
Instead of trying to tax lawful citizens, you should learn to manage your city with existing funds or step down from office.
If you can’t stop the criminals, do not try to weaken your citizens.
Jeffrey Fylling
Location: 92627, Costa Mesa
Submitted At: 10:39am 01-24-22
I am opposed to this ordinance. Stop penalizing the responsible gun owners.
Larry Czoka
Location: 92110, San Diego
Submitted At: 10:39am 01-24-22
I strongly OPPOSE the so-called Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance.
This law does absolutely nothing to reduce violent crime. Law abiding gun owning citizens are not the ones that are committing the crimes, and these are the people that you are trying to punish.
Please address the real issue of being soft on criminals and enforce the existing laws you have. Y ou will not stop gun violence by punishing law abiding gun owners.
Frank VanSant
Location: 95648, Lincoln
Submitted At: 10:38am 01-24-22
This just another way for money to be brought into the coffers of politicians that can't do their fiduciary responsibility. This also targets law abiding gun owners which is so very wrong on many levels.
Concerned Voter
Location: 94087, Sunnyvale
Submitted At: 10:38am 01-24-22
Taxing a subset of our local population in the name of public safety is wrong.
Frederick Sorensen
Location: 95993-8986, Yuba City
Submitted At: 10:37am 01-24-22
Once again politicians propose an ordinance to penalize legal gun owners to pay for criminal behavior. this is outrageous. Stop this nonsense. Enforce the gun laws on the books and punish the criminals. The Second Amendment shall not be infringed.
THE SAN JOSE MUNICIPAL CODE TO REDUCE GUN HARM BY REQUIRING GUN OWNERS TO OBTAIN
AND MAINTAIN LIABILITY INSURANCE AND ESTABLISHMENT OF
ANNUAL GUN HARM REDUCTION FEE
Dave Ickert
Location: 95111, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:37am 01-24-22
This proposal limits those without the funds to own a means of self defense.
Please spend Our tax dollars by pursuing criminals with weapons that they intend to use on us, the good tax paying citizens of San Jose.
Why do you continue to waste our tax dollars on an initiative that you know in advance does not pass the legal smell test?
Gene Piellusch
Location: 95963, Orland
Submitted At: 10:37am 01-24-22
Y our communist agenda will not be tolerated, and anyone on the town council needs to be removed for failure to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America--Live up to your oath! Drew Azevedo
Location: 95118, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:36am 01-24-22
The focus of this act will do nothing to combat those who have obtained guns illegally or prevent further crimes from happening. All it does is add further restrictions and financial hardship to those who have followed the rules and maintained responsible gun owners since the beginning. It alludes to legal gun owners being the ones at fault rather than those who continue to commit gun violence. Address the actual problem.
Gary Tritt
Location: @5073, Soquel
Submitted At: 10:35am 01-24-22
Y our ordinance to tax gun owners is an infringement of the right to own or bear firearms. This is a misguided ordinance that will only create confusion and divisions within the city of San Jose.
Cole Fournier
Location: 95340, Merced
Submitted At: 10:34am 01-24-22
Make the criminals with weapons pay for their acts not the law abiding 2A folks! Albert Zhou
Location: 91780, Temple City
Submitted At: 10:33am 01-24-22
Shall not.
Jeff Burmann
Location: 94591, Vallejo
Submitted At: 10:33am 01-24-22
It is not in the interest of law abiding citizens to have any rights removed, especially if they relate to self defense.
Any rule or ordinance you create to hinder the lawful right to bear arms in any way will only adversely affect these good people. If you wish to make meaningful impact on these issues, you must punish criminals to the fullest extent to disincentivize bad behavior. There is no excuse and no room for crime in our society.
Gary Levy
Location:
Submitted At: 10:32am 01-24-22
Y ou cannot tax a Right guaranteed by the Constitution. The policies of big cities have created untenable quality of life and spiking crime rates in urban areas. It seems San Jose is no different. Its leaders care little about arresting criminals and wants to punish law abiding citizens, and make them dependent on law enforcement, which has been rendered substandard for their basic protection. Don't restrict the right to self-defense.
Rodolfo Adame
Location: 92562-7200, MURRIETA
Submitted At: 10:31am 01-24-22
It is illogical to tax law abiding citizens in order to pursue criminals.
Steve Bledl
Location: 92804, ANAHEIM
Submitted At: 10:30am 01-24-22
Requiring insurance and fees is unacceptable.
Allen Umbarger
Location: 92882, Corona
Submitted At: 10:30am 01-24-22
Go after the criminal not the law abiding citizen
Greg Tucker
Location: 92027-4722, Escondido
Submitted At: 10:29am 01-24-22
Please don't infringe on the second amendment. Don't tax the law abiding citizens. Put criminals in jail and quit letting them out on a ticket just to break the law again. rita piziali
Location: 95648-8785, Lincoln
Submitted At: 10:28am 01-24-22
I 100% OPPOSE the Gun Harm Reduction Notice. It is in clear opposition to both the 1st and 2nd Amendments.
It must be stopped and you much vote to oppose it and drop it. We are entitled to keep and bear arms as citizens and if you enforced the law, this would be a non-issue. Focus on the root of the problem and prosecute criminals.
It is clearly not lawful citizens owning guns to protect themselves or hunting.
Tim Reissmueller
Location: CA
Submitted At: 10:28am 01-24-22
This racist proposal needs to be stopped. Y ou are either supporting the ownership of illegal weapons or simply supporting legal ownership for the elite. Please vote no on this and show us that you care about all of society and not just those that can afford the protection you receive.
Ronald Barton
Location: 95422, CLEARLAKE
Submitted At: 10:28am 01-24-22
Read the 2nd amendment, again....and read it ALOUD
Mike N
Location: 94066, San Bruno
Submitted At: 10:28am 01-24-22
This law does absolutely nothing to reduce violent crime. Law abiding citizens are not the ones that are committing the crimes, and these are the people that you are punishing. This is a pure money grab by the county and government. Y ou are being sneaky and absolutely going against the 2nd amendment. This is a blatant pay to play scenario where you are trying to price out everyone that wants to uphold their 2nd amendment right.
Ray Terry
Location: 95117, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:28am 01-24-22
Writing to request that you oppose the so-called Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance. Please oppose.
Sincerely,
Ray Terry
Heather Hanley
Location:
Submitted At: 10:27am 01-24-22
Crime is up due to economic policies and being soft on crime. Law abiding citizens who want to buy a gun to protect themselves from rising crime and uncertainty are punished. This makes no sense and further shows whose side our political leaders are on. They are on the side of taking no accountability for their failed policies and are against law abiding citizens.
Marc Rumpler
Location: 95448, Healdsburg
Submitted At: 10:26am 01-24-22
Please address the real issue of being soft on criminals and enforce the existing laws you have. Y ou will not stop gun violence by punishing law abiding gun owners.
cory henry
Location: 91942, la mesa
Submitted At: 10:26am 01-24-22
This is another attempt to punish law abiding gun owners for the actions of criminals. Once criminals are held accountable then we can look for other solutions.
J C
Location:
Submitted At: 10:25am 01-24-22
This is as ridiculous as it sounds and I expect nothing less from an inept city council. Obviously law abiding 2A people are the issue in their minds. The gangbangers and mentally ill who are responsible for all gun violence are not. Let's continue to coddle them San Jose!
Michael Kennedy
Location: 92592, Temecula
Submitted At: 10:25am 01-24-22
This ordinance is in direct violation of the 2nd amendment rights of the citizens of your city. Please DO NOT approve this ordinance. Do not punish those that want to be able to defend themselves against the criminals that the police can not.
Jeremy Lefort
Location: 14225, Cheektowaga
Submitted At: 10:23am 01-24-22
I strongly oppose this ordinance; which is an additional tax on law abiding citizens.
B Shaw
Location:
Submitted At: 10:23am 01-24-22
The entire purpose of this effort is to “impound weapons”. This is from legal owners and not criminals. It is an illegal tax and I don’t support it.
Andy Roth
Location: 92116, San Diego
Submitted At: 10:22am 01-24-22
Taxing law abiding citizens will not reduce crime and we know you are aware of this. Enforce the existing laws is the only way to reduce crime.
Justin Vidal
Location: 95054, Santa Clara
Submitted At: 10:22am 01-24-22
The proposed ordinance is a waste of tax payer dollars, it will accomplish nothing beyond putting an undue burden onto law abiding gun owners, and restricting their rights. Please vote no on this ill advised item, voting this forward will do nothing other than have it tied up in court for years, with it ultimately failing anyway, please put the money to better use for the people of San Jose.
Phillip leber
Location: 95124, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:21am 01-24-22
I oppose the gun ordinance
Mark Mondrogon
Location: 94585, Suisun City
Submitted At: 10:21am 01-24-22
Third time you moved the comments section.... Trying to silence comments? Y ou are attempting to enact unconstitutional laws, it will be challenged, you will loose and you are making the residents pay for the defense of an indefensible position. Y ou all need your pink slips! John ng
Location: 95120, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:19am 01-24-22
Please do not infringe on our 2A right!!!
Jacquie Heffner
Location: 95123, San Jose
Submitted At: 5:30pm 01-23-22
I am in favor of this ordinance and ask that the city council votes to approve actions which can help reduce gun violence in our city. This ordinance does not infringe on the right to bear arms, rather it requires those who own guns be responsible for the costs incurred by San Jose taxpayers when responding and dealing with gun related crimes. There is no other industrialized nation in the world that experiences the amount of death and harm due to guns that our nation suffers from.
Richard Timpa
Location: 95124, San jose
Submitted At: 3:35pm 01-23-22
This proposal ridiculous. We as citizens in this city should not be subject to these type of prohibited taxes and infringements. Why is it that if someone steals and unlawfully possesses a firearm they are simply slapped with a misdemeanor and goes about his merry way. It’s about time the city places higher penalties on true criminals and not infringe on honest citizens. Any councilmember willing to vote yes on this issue will definitely not get my vote ever.
sawyer lane
Location: 95521, ARCATA
Submitted At: 3:28pm 01-23-22
This is just another way to prevent poor people from owning firearms.
Oscar Yu
Location: 92122, SAN DIEGO
Submitted At: 1:45pm 01-23-22
As stated in the Bill of Rights, the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. What this law proposes is exactly an infringement upon such right and is a violation of our constitution.
James Hillenbrand
Location:
Submitted At: 1:14pm 01-23-22
This is a gross infringement on the 2nd amendment, a hollow plan that includes taxation without representation as well as disregard for the God given right to defend your life and the lives of your loved ones.Y ou should all be ashamed of yourselves for even considering this. Sincerely, Disgusted Citizen.
Lynnard Barnes
Location: 95111, San Jose
Submitted At: 11:18am 01-23-22
Simply ridiculous. How about you stop neglecting the facts and tackle the real issues. I can tell you it's not guns.
Y ou're trying to impose fees and taxes on people who aren't committing crimes. Y ou think criminals have guns registered in their names. Most crime happens in poverty stricken area, but you're exempting the poor? Please stop this foolishness. Do not pass this bill. Matter of fact, do not bring up gun control again. Focus your time in office on mental health and homlessness.
John Doe
Location:
Submitted At: 10:31am 01-23-22
The logic of reducing gun related harm by placing more fees upon the law abiding citizen is flawed. Gun owners that have done nothing wrong would be negatively effected by the hindrance of their right to keep and bear arms.
If this were to pass the targeted potential wrong doers would be further encouraged to obtain firearms illegally to avoid the city of San Jose's and the state of California's overly complex process of obtaining firearms. Not enough characters are provided to explain myself.
Agenda Item: eComments for 4.1 22-045 Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance. - TO BE HEARD AT 6:00 P.M.
Overall Sentiment
Edmund Kwong
Location: 95123
Submitted At: 11:44am 01-25-22
Strongly oppose any local politician that supports this nonsense.
Marcel Burlet
Location: 95037, Morgan Hill
Submitted At: 11:43am 01-25-22
If San Jose were serious about charging law abiding guns owners for the costs of firearms violence, they should not exempt the police department.
Barbara MacNeil
Location: 95136, San Jose
Submitted At: 11:41am 01-25-22
We are OPPOSED to this ordinance. Instead of going after legal gun owners, go after those who own or obtain guns illegally, including ghost guns.
Michael Murphy
Location: 95111, San Jose
Submitted At: 11:37am 01-25-22
This is one of the dumbest and unconstitutional ideas that I have ever heard. I am strongly opposed. I tell everyone about how strongly I feel against this proposal. Strongly Opposed.
Kevin Lim
Location: 95035, Milpitas
Submitted At: 11:26am 01-25-22
Strongly opposed
phillipe cardoso
Location: 95134, San Jose
Submitted At: 11:24am 01-25-22
This needs to be opposed! I can't believe legislators can come up with something like this thinking this will reduce, prevent or remediate gun violence. Punishing law abiding citizens and raising fees and taxes won't make our city any safer. This can't be passed and the Council needs to oppose such non-sense. Law Enforcement can't be everywhere all the time and adding another fee and another step between a law abiding citizen and a gun will only create more dissiparity! OPPOSE THIS, NOW!
Christian Pichay
Location: 95116, San Jose
Submitted At: 11:19am 01-25-22
I am writing in opposition to this ordinance. Mandating a fee and registration specifically to gun owners with the consequence of gun confiscation of otherwise lawfully possessed firearms is a violation of the constitutional right to keep and bear arms and the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Confiscating firearms from citizens will not improve public safety but will instead further victimize citizens and leave them vulnerable to armed criminals who have always ignored laws to begin with.
Brian Mckay
Location: 95118, San jose
Submitted At: 11:18am 01-25-22
Once again the city is finding ways to make bad guys out of law abiding citizens. This will not solve the problem but only attack the ones that are not the problem. I also feel this will strongly effect lower income areas, in a city that is already extremely expensive to live. Strongly oppose this.
Thomas Scocca
Location: 95118, San Jose
Submitted At: 11:17am 01-25-22
-Many "Studies" cited in: Supplemental Memorandum, 1/21/2022 cannot be cited as academic studies, have not been subject to review of a rigorous academic process. Any policy proposal that relies on the cited "studies" is flawed at the outset.
-The proposed fee is a tax on a fundamental right, this is the equivalent of a poll tax and will not withstand legal challenge.
-The bulk of violent crime and injuries incurred during those crimes comes from other types of weapons; knives, fists, etc.
Concerned Citizen
Location:
Submitted At: 11:12am 01-25-22
To whom it may concern,
California leads the nation by cost of living. Often the poor and disenfranchised are the ones that are hurt most when punitive measures like the ones being suggested here are enforced. How are people supposed to afford firearm ownership if they already are subjected to living in unsafe communities because they cannot afford to leave?
This proposal will set forward a punitive precedent that will overwhelmingly affect poor Californians. Exempting Law Enforcement is wrong
John Sheeha
Location: 95120, San Jose
Submitted At: 11:11am 01-25-22
Won’t do anything to reduce gun crime.
Adrian Escobedo
Location: 61102, Rockford
Submitted At: 11:06am 01-25-22
Just nonsensical. Y ou're charging people for owning something that a bad actor used for criminal purposes.
Would you propose a car tax in response to drunk driving incidents? Road rage? No, you wouldn't, because it makes as much sense as this "Gun Harm Reduction" fee. This is embarrassing, and you're making yourselves look bad. Oppose the ordinance.
Ernest Ortiz
Location: 95051, Santa Clara
Submitted At: 10:55am 01-25-22
I oppose any and all gun control measures the SJ City Council is proposing. Y ou will end up hurting innocent people and make San Jose a dangerous place to live.
Ryan Harrison
Location: 92602, Irvine
Submitted At: 10:54am 01-25-22
A tax on weapons will simply penalize those law abiding citizens who wish to own a firearm and do little to prevent future crime and violence. This tax will also disproportionately affect those of low and very low income who seek to own a firearm for home defense. Please take into account that those who would need this most are often in lower income areas. It's wrong to prohibit an individual by creating even more of a monetary barrier for what has been deemed a constitutional right.
Jim Krepelka
Location: 95118, San jose
Submitted At: 10:50am 01-25-22
Long ago, Southern Democrats imposed a poll tax on the residents of their areas hoping it would discourage people of color from participating in voting. Now San Jose Democrats are imposing a gun ownership tax to discourage law abiding citizens from participating in the second Amendment. Shame on the city counsel for this.
And shame on the Mayor for not shutting it down. How weak.
Haim Chapaev
Location: San Jose
Submitted At: 10:37am 01-25-22
At no point somebody said lets disarm criminals. Why is it always aimed at law abiding citizens? Please stop restricting constitution which was written by better people than us Tobias Wade
Location: 95117, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:34am 01-25-22
Hello,
I want to add my voice and oppose this 1 22-045 Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance. It is a tax on a constitutional right. This is unjust and punitive to those who exercise their constitutional right. Whats next taxing free speech? Passing an ordinance that is so vague as to not even give a difinitive cost to the people is ridiculous. Lastly, how does this stop crime? If you can afford to pay a tax and insurance, then why would you commit a crime? Criminals dont follow the rules.
Bruce Frank
Location: 95128, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:30am 01-25-22
How it is the financial responsibility of the law abiding citizen and legal gun owner to be uniquely burdened with fees and insurance policies to cover the costs of normal law enforcement against criminal activity? Are there insurance policies on syringe manufacturers to clean the streets of paraphernalia created by those using illegal drugs? Two million crimes a year are prevented by legally armed citizens. Y our proposed fees and insurance burdens will have the greatest impact on the poor.
James Bird
Location: 95050, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:28am 01-25-22
This is a ridiculous waste of money adding only more oversight and government interference, while taking away the rights of law-abiding gun-owning citizens. Instead of the city going after those who have committed crimes that are already on the books, And seeking compensation from those individuals, the city Council proposes to add additional requirements and restrictions to punish the responsible gun owners who obey and follow the myriad of existing laws. This ordinance fails basic common sense Bill Buhlman
Location: 94509, Antioch
Submitted At: 10:27am 01-25-22
Stop criminalizing law abiding citizens
George Anderson
Location: 95126-2022, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:19am 01-25-22
Violates our right to bare arms.
Yaochun Chiang
Location: 95124, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:16am 01-25-22
If law enforcement can not protect civilian, do not restrict our rights to protect our family.
Hung Huynh
Location:
Submitted At: 10:12am 01-25-22
This is a direct attack on our 2nd amendment right and will not solve crime. We the people will remember all those who vote in favor of this and will vote you out!
Joshua Marcus
Location: 95136, San jose
Submitted At: 10:06am 01-25-22
Do it pass this. This is an infringement on the second amendment.
Chris Giangreco
Location:
Submitted At: 10:01am 01-25-22
The overwhelming number of responses in opposition to this ordinance crashed the system days ago. Those opposed have broken the technological back of San Jose. - yet they will not listen to our voices. The only way is to vote them out, but they are trying thwart that as well with non-citizen voting in SJ.
B T
Location: 95138, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:56am 01-25-22
I'm a life-long democrat and more recent gun owner and I vehemently oppose this ordinance. It is short-sighted, misinformed, and reactionary - none of which are how policies should be made. It punishes law-abiding citizens, people who want to protect their loved ones, and creates more barriers to do so, especially in a time when we feel unsafe in San Jose. It discourages legal gun ownership and disproportionately impacts different communities. I'm embarrassed to have voted for Mayor Liccardo.
Eric Lam
Location: 95136, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:48am 01-25-22
I vehemently oppose this.
John Saunders
Location: 95070, Saratoga
Submitted At: 9:44am 01-25-22
Lawful and responsible gun owners should NOT be liable for the bad deeds of outlaws.
Scott Small
Location: 95128, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:44am 01-25-22
City has enough funding problems without electing for huge legal costs to defend flawed regulations. Passage of similarly targeted policy will hasten disposition of my property in SJ Shi Cheng
Location: 94087, Sunnyvale
Submitted At: 9:39am 01-25-22
Any restriction to limit a citizen’s lawful right to own a firearm is strongly opposed and condemned.
Luigi Covelli
Location: 95118, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:29am 01-25-22
I oppose any firearm insurance or tax mandate on firearms. These policies you are trying to impose will not be forgotten by your constituents and i request you think about the additional taxes as your future resignation set forth by voters of San Jose. Choose your destiny wisely.
Marvin Hammer
Location: 95132, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:26am 01-25-22
This law will have no affect on the criminal element and a negative effect on law abiding citizen. Please don't pass this tax.
Yanhuan Cheng
Location: 95138, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:25am 01-25-22
Is this a scam to prevent the poor and people of color to obtain firearms? It's not racism? I know that constitution doesn't mean anything to you so you are doing this to hurt people who need to defend themselves.
Steve Peck
Location: 95123, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:24am 01-25-22
If this Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance passes there will be litigation, and the big question will be how much money is the City willing to spend defending this ordinance – remember this will be the only law of its kind in the United States.
Before the City Council thinks about approving, they better have a clear understating of how much City money are they willing to spend trying to defend this ordinance years after they all leave office.
Larry Evans
Location: 95124, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:23am 01-25-22
I oppose the Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance, Agenda 4.1 22-045 because it does absolutely NOTHING to control gun harm and only INFRINGES on law abiding citizens right to protect themselves. Oh, it doesn't infringe you say. I am retired on fixed income. I cannot afford several things I would like to buy let alone something as stupid as this.
Y ou are making yourselves look like idiots. Either do something really constructive or go find a job you are better suited for!
Shannon Huestis
Location: 93612, CLOVIS
Submitted At: 9:18am 01-25-22
I oppose this ordinance, you shouldn't be required to pay additional fees for the firearms you own or plan to buy.
Qiang Lin
Location: 95138-2471, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:12am 01-25-22
This doesn't solve any crime problem and put an unfair burden on law abiding citizens. Criminals don't abide the law and they acquire firearms illegally. Gun control has no effect on them and you all know this very well. If damages caused by criminals should be paid by citizens, why don't you try your trick on knives? The same mayor said "go get a gun" when questioned about the shortage in law enforcement and he also said that criminals wouldn't care. This proposal is just a disgusting scam.
Michelle Marcus
Location: 95118, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:12am 01-25-22
This fee and policy will not stop crime, it will only affect law abiding citizens. It is an absolute invasion of my rights and privacy and I STRONL Y OPPOSE THIS PROPOSED ORDINANCE! The 2nd Amendment shall not be infringed and this is exactly what the city is attempting to do.
William Akin
Location: 95139, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:09am 01-25-22
Don't want more taxes and all this does is hurt safe gun owners... not fair and not something I support. Let's tax out of existence guns is the tactic used here...
J S
Location:
Submitted At: 9:07am 01-25-22
This is a brazen attack on the 2nd Ammedment right of law abiding citizens and amounts to naked political theater and you know it. The woke anti police and low/no bail policies are slowly destroying SJ and the viability of SJPD. https://sanjosespotlight.com/san-jose-police-department-struggles-to-staff-up-cops-sjpd/. Seems your focus is better turned elsewhere. Leave us alone.
Rob H
Location:
Submitted At: 9:07am 01-25-22
Gun ownership isn’t just a right for those who can afford to pay high fees. Unlike driving, it’s not a privilege, it’s a right.
This is clearly a violation of that.
While the Supreme Court has entertained many creative methods to deprive citizens of rights, this isn’t one that is likely to succeed.
Please don’t waste time, money, and public trust on a crusade against your own citizens and voters.
Don’t justify the fears of “gun grab” politics and deepen the divide with bad laws.
Larry Silva
Location: 95125, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:03am 01-25-22
I do not support yet another "gun control" action. Cities with the most strict gun control laws see the highest level of homicides and gun related crimes. This action taxes the legal gun owners and does nothing to stop the unlawful gun owners that are more likely to commit crimes with a gun. Again, this law "does nothing" to stop unlawful gun ownership or violent use of a firearm. Are you ready to tax all car owners to cover DUI costs? Quit taking advantage of law abiding citizens of San Jose!
Will Nevis
Location: 95110, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:00am 01-25-22
There's just no way that this is constitutional. It won't hold up in court and is a huge waste of resources for the city.
Louis Marcus
Location: 95118, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:00am 01-25-22
This fee is absurd and only affects law abiding citizens NOT criminals! Bob Shoberg
Location: 95136, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:00am 01-25-22
I believe that Sam Liccardo's proposal to require gun owners get liability insurance will only have one effect - involve San Jose in an expensive law suit. From reading the proposal it appears to be unconstitutional, almost impossible to enforce, and will do nothing to reduce violence. I'm strongly opposed to this proposal.
Melvin Dahlin
Location:
Submitted At: 8:57am 01-25-22
Will only hurt the law abiding citizens.
Timothy McConnell
Location: 95148, San Jose
Submitted At: 8:56am 01-25-22
punishing good people with taxes and fees doesnt do anything to change a criminals behavior Abel P
Location: 95132, San jose
Submitted At: 8:56am 01-25-22
Violating the second amendment rights of law abiding gun owners in San Jose by adding additional taxes & fees is absolutely not the ideal method to slow restless criminals and evil entities from carrying out their destruction in our beautiful city. Owning a firearm is not a privilege you have to pay a “fee” or tax for, it is a constitutional right for every American and shall not be infringed upon. Please do not pass this ordinance! Bruce K
Location:
Submitted At: 8:51am 01-25-22
I wish to remain anonymous, but this “fee” is ridiculous. Imagine proposing a fee on the right to vote. Ridiculous.
Second, how would criminals ever follow this. Show us statistics detailing who perpetrated the gun violence you speak of before trying to pass some ordinance without even giving us the costs. Focus on providing mental healthcare along with cleaning up our streets both figuratively and literally.
I strongly oppose this law.
Dennis Cochran
Location: 95127, San Jose
Submitted At: 7:53am 01-25-22
This new law will do nothing to prevent or reduce gun violence. How do you think you can impose new taxes and requirements to the group of people who already follow the law and legally poses firearms? Criminals will never buy insurance or register a gun.
Maybe you could work on the homeless issue rather that something that is lacking in common sense.
I oppose this new law
Kili Fabyan
Location: 95361, Oakdale
Submitted At: 7:10am 01-25-22
I oppose this ordinance, you shouldn't be required to pay additional fees for the firearms you own or plan to buy.
Paula Shindler
Location: 95361, Oakdale
Submitted At: 6:37am 01-25-22
I oppose this ordinance. I shouldn't be required to pay additional fees for the firearms I own or plan to buy.
Cindy Lapp
Location: 19508
Submitted At: 6:18am 01-25-22
Please do not penalize people who wish to protect themselves & their families. Times are especially perilous now with so many police departments having issues and the increase in crimes. Please understand that criminals do not follow laws-which is why they are criminals. Enforcing the laws that we already have & punishing the 'bad guys', firearms/protection in the hands of law abiding citizens would not be an issue. Thank you for taking into consideration the safety of your citizens.
Jonathan M
Location: 95050
Submitted At: 2:09am 01-25-22
Honorable San Jose City council,
I respectfully urge you to dismiss this ordinance. This measure will not make San Jose a safer city, and will impose a unique burden on its residents. These open the city itself to legal challenges and legal costs. This annual NGO "fee" should be legislated like a TAX. The required liability insurance does not exist as an insurance product. And the mandate to produce forms to an officer on request is an Orwellian "papers please". I urge you to oppose.
Anonymous Citizen
Location: San Jose
Submitted At: 12:51am 01-25-22
I am a law abiding citizen and I have worked in the police department. There are many ways to reduce violent crimes and this isn’t it. As a California native, I have seen the Second Ammendment being stripped away And at a faster rate in recent times. In the interest of justice, please do not me move forward with this proposal.
Steven Pham
Location:
Submitted At: 12:01am 01-25-22
This only seeks to have law abiding gun owners of San Jose to pay a yearly fee plus insurance to cover for violence and crimes they were never involved with. There are already several state and city laws that already address gun ownership with California being the top three strictest in the nation. Why is this attempting to be passed without the details worked out first? Undetermined administrative fees. It is unlikely to find insurance that will cover negligence or even firearms.
Minh Hodges
Location: 94043-3361, Mountain View
Submitted At: 11:50pm 01-24-22
I strongly oppose this "gun harm reduction ordinance". I don't really see the need to impose such requirements on the gun owners when they have done nothing wrong. These ordinances will do little to nothing to reduce the amount of violence on the streets. If criminals want to break the law, these ordinances will not do anything to deter their behaviors. This ordinance will undoubtedly place undue burdens on the rights to keep and bear arms for the citizens of San Jose!
Kirk N
Location:
Submitted At: 11:44pm 01-24-22
Strongly oppose this “gun harm reduction ordinance”. Why impose such a thing on law abiding citizens? I saw a news brief with the SJ mayor comparing gun ownership to driving a car and car insurance. Driving is a privilege...owning a gun is a constitutional right. Privileges versus Rights are vastly different and one can’t compare the two in the same sentence!
Joseph Carmona
Location: 95128, San Jose
Submitted At: 11:10pm 01-24-22
I respectfully urge you to oppose the Public Safety Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance. This ordinance does nothing to increase public safety. It places an undue burden on the law abiding of their constitutional rights by creating legal and monetary punishments for the residents of the City of San Jose. It will have no effect on criminals who possess illegal firearms. The provisions in this plan make zero sense. Residents of San Jose will lose confidence in the city’s leadership with this ordinance.
Anthony A
Location:
Submitted At: 11:05pm 01-24-22
I strongly oppose this position, potential legislation, and egregious government overstep. Gun ownership is a constitutional right, not a privilege. The mayor's assertion that vehicle fatalities reduced more than 80% due to insurance is ridiculous. Maybe, I don't know, vehicle safety and technology improved over time? This will do absolutely nothing to stop gun violence. It will only cause undue financial hardship on law abiding citizens who choose to exercise their rights. Oppose this position!
Jared R
Location:
Submitted At: 10:51pm 01-24-22
Oppose - please vote against this unconstitutional bill.
Diego I
Location: 95123, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:33pm 01-24-22
This is bad policy. If the goal is to truly enact change seek the input of responsible gun owners to come to the table to work on solutions rather than impose unnecessary sanctions on your constituents.
Christian Shindler
Location: 95361, Oakdale
Submitted At: 10:19pm 01-24-22
Please vote no on this new ordinance
This ordinance requires that people pay to exercise their right to bear arms. This places a heavy burden on the people trying to exercise their rights. This could be too much for people to afford. This will cause great confusion and make people criminals that already own firearms but don’t stay up to date on firearm news because they aren’t enthusiasts. People will likely have to pay big fines or potentially go to jail for simply being unaware of this law.
Viktor Zeltser
Location: 95126, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:14pm 01-24-22
This 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 gun 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.
Evan Thompson
Location: 95123, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:01pm 01-24-22
I am a survivor of the Gilroy Garlic Festival mass shooting. I know the trauma that comes with gun violence, and I am aware of the costs that come with it.
The proposal of an annual gun ownership fee and mandatory liability insurance will be completely ineffective at reducing gun violence. This incentivizes people to acquire unregistered firearms, which is dangerous to the public and the police.
Calvin T
Location:
Submitted At: 8:45pm 01-24-22
I strongly oppose this ordinance because it doesn't do anything but target law abiding citizens. As a comparison, shouldn't all drivers have to pay a fee then for the damages caused by drunk or impaired drivers? I would like to add that the damages caused by them are far more severe in both fiscal and emotional damages as well. Why should we law abiding citizens be responsible for the actions of criminals who act selfishly and break the laws regardless?
Russell Wong
Location: 94025, Menlo Park
Submitted At: 8:42pm 01-24-22
Please explain how the criminal using a firearm not under his name shooting up a location will be dissuaded by money coming out of my pocket
Steven T
Location: San Jose
Submitted At: 8:32pm 01-24-22
I strongly oppose this ordnance because it does nothing but hurt law abiding citizens. Why should law abiding citizens pay for actions of other who disobey laws all the time. Its like blaming the victim for a hit and run he/she did not cause and paying the criminal a new car and gets away with it. This Ordnance does nothing but encourage criminals to commit more crimes while the law abiding citizens pays for it dearly.
Arcel Dimalanta
Location: 95123, San Jose
Submitted At: 8:18pm 01-24-22
Good evening, I ask that you please vote against this unconstitutional bill. william tran
Location: 95133, SAN JOSE
Submitted At: 8:14pm 01-24-22
I strongly oppose this, your incompetence will not prevent criminals from already breaking the laws. Taxing law abiding citizens for your own profit is what the British have done in the 18th century.
Manzano Tactical
Location: 95112, San Jose
Submitted At: 8:01pm 01-24-22
Y our inability to see how anti American your actions are will be your demise. No wonder your own POA and officers dislike you, because your actions create more work for them.
William Lai
Location: 95122, San Jose
Submitted At: 7:59pm 01-24-22
I strongly oppose this ordinance. These laws will do absolutely nothing to prevent crime and nothing to stop gun violence. These laws will achieve nothing but punish law abiding citizens. Why are we taxing gun owners on a constitutionally given right? Our political leaders are continually breaking their oath of office and infringing the rights of the people. This is ridiculous
Duds Rivera
Location: 95123, San Jose
Submitted At: 7:34pm 01-24-22
This is an undue burden on our 2nd amendment rights. Law abiding citizens should not be charged for the acts of criminals. As someone who works in EMS, I see the devastation of all types of violence every day. But you know who perpetrates most of it.. CRIMINALS. People who will NOT be paying these fees. People who DON'T have their arms registered. Oh yeah let's not forget the people this local government keep letting out of prison due to woke progressive idealogy.
Ryan Nozaki
Location: 95123, San Jose
Submitted At: 7:28pm 01-24-22
I strongly oppose the city’s proposal of this ordinance of firearms insurance. Adding “fees” upon a constitutional right is unjust and abusive. Not only does it cause a burden to exercise these founding American rights, but allows the doors to be open to add “fees” to other rights. Fees to exercise the freedom of speech; insurance fees for defamations, hate speeches, etc. CA has already taken the liberty to leap frog off TX’s abortion ban and applied that to the firearms industry. Thank you.
Mandy Rathjen
Location:
Submitted At: 7:09pm 01-24-22
I oppose this unconstitutional act! Our founding fathers gave us these rights for a reason and you can’t take them away. As government you should focus on keeping guns out of criminal hands instead of taxing law abiding citizens.
Ed Lee
Location: 95120, San jose
Submitted At: 6:41pm 01-24-22
To the idiot that drafted this ordinance...are you working for the criminals??? Why are you punishing law abiding citizens???
True American
Location:
Submitted At: 6:10pm 01-24-22
This is another infringement and a money grab from San Jose.
Tell us how you will get criminals to comply with this ordinance? Make all the supporters of this made public so they can be listed as Anti-American Deborah H
Location: San Jose
Submitted At: 5:43pm 01-24-22
I am a San Jose resident and I oppose this ordinance. It's already illegal to use weapons to assault or kill others.
Enforce the current laws and punish the criminals, not law abiding citizens.
Frank David
Location:
Submitted At: 5:14pm 01-24-22
The Obama CDC found that guns are used to save lives up to 3 million times a year. Why do you want people to die without a means to protect themselves?
R W
Location: 95112, San Jose
Submitted At: 4:56pm 01-24-22
This is an infringement on the rights of law abiding citizens to protect themselves. It will disproportionally affect low income communities and law abiding citizens who need firearms to protect themselves because they are underserved by law enforcement. This is political stunt by Sam Licardo to further his political career and virtue signal at the cost of the safety of the citizens of San Jose.
I L
Location:
Submitted At: 4:06pm 01-24-22
Unconstitutional, oppose before you waste more time and (my) money.
R F
Location: 92866, Orange
Submitted At: 3:02pm 01-24-22
Not only is this tone deaf and a blatant infringement on an individual's Second Amendment rights, this ordinance, like all gun control, further punishes law-abiding citizens forthe failure of the government to address the economic and mental health problems in the community. Criminals will ignore this and go unpunished by this. Nothing will change, and all you will have proven is your own incompetence. Even if this WAS a good idea, you NEED to prove this insurance is attainable.
Andrew Ronstadt
Location: 94085, SUNNYVALE
Submitted At: 2:44pm 01-24-22
Complete and total nonsense. Gun control only hurts law abiding gun owners while doing absolutely nothing to reduce crime.
D M
Location: 95125, San Jose
Submitted At: 1:50pm 01-24-22
This bill is Ordinance is preposterous on its face. No such insurance exist for negligence, and utilizing your 2nd amendment right should not have to come with insurance. Y ou can't vote on fees then say what they are. That leads to robbing the populace! The fee to the non profit is forced charity. How do I know how those funds are being utilized? Since it is getting tax payer money do I get an open accounting of the use? This is violation and will do nothing to reduce violent
Andrew Hake
Location: 95126, San Jose
Submitted At: 1:44pm 01-24-22
This is an absolute ridiculous proposal being pushed by someone clearly trying to extend their political career.
There is no reason to think this type of proposal will have any effect on crime involving guns. Where does it stop? Why not tax individual police officers for the harm caused by the collective police force? Why not tax all city council members and politicians when actions they take cause harm to the community? Benjamin Lee
Location: 95035, Milpitas
Submitted At: 1:18pm 01-24-22
I live and work in the South Bay. Pass through San Jose to get to Milpitas everyday.
How does this ordinance prevent crime and help SJ? Guns involved in crime have been illegally possessed, unregistered. How do you track them? This bill does not stop criminals, only the legally armed/innocent. For what? The police are stretched thin. It encourages criminals that there are less guns to stop them.
Y ou wouldn't tax a race because some members happen to be criminals, but you are ok with this? Eric B
Location: 95126, San Jose
Submitted At: 1:10pm 01-24-22
Sorry your comments are getting brigaded by pro-gun forums. As a firearm owner myself, I would love to see further study of harm reduction measures, including liability insurance to provide assistance for those hurt or killed due to gun violence. Additionally, I would like to see the insurance cost be decreased/offset by providing proof of firearm training or certifications, proof of safe storage purchase (lockbox/safe), etc; essentially similar to good driver or defensive driving auto discounts
Kit Wetzler
Location: 95014, Cupertino
Submitted At: 12:57pm 01-24-22
The city of San Jose is proposing punishing law abiding citizens for their own failures of addressing the mental health of our populace. This legislation places an undue burden on citizens and needs to be shot down K T
Location: 95148, san jose
Submitted At: 12:35pm 01-24-22
Why is the city going out of its way to punish law abiding citizens who are exercising their second amendment rights? there are so many laws that are already on the books. go after the criminals instead of law abiding citizens. elected officials are hypocrites. they welcome armed security while doing everything in their power to disarm citizens. their betrayal of public safety is shameful!!!! Fabiano Russo
Location: 90260, Lawndale
Submitted At: 12:27pm 01-24-22
Why punish law abiding citizens for complying with the law??? This doesn’t do anything to stop crimes!!
Why don’t you go after criminals instead of releasing them? Eric Lee
Location:
Submitted At: 12:25pm 01-24-22
Law-abiding gun owners already bend over backwards (quite literally) to abide by draconian CA gun laws to lawfully exercise their legal civil right enshrined in the 2nd Amendment. To attempt to lay blame upon these citizens for failures by elected officials such as City Council and the DA's office to appropriately deter crime via the myriad of means available to them is pure folly. This unconstitutional conduct by Council will simply result in legal action at taxpayer-expense. I strongly oppose.
Terry Anderson
Location: 92551, Moreno Valley
Submitted At: 12:13pm 01-24-22
My name is Terry Anderson.
I have heard about the new legislation being proposed there in San Jose. Although I am not a resident of the city, I am still here to voice a through concern of this legislation.
It does the exact opposite of trying to make anything safe. Implementing fines and threading to take away property of those who can’t pay is wrong and inhumane. I do not agree with this new proposal for “gun safety.” Criminals don’t pay a fee to do crimes, lawful citizens shouldn’t have to.
Eric Jones
Location:
Submitted At: 12:12pm 01-24-22
Don't punish law abiding gun owners. This will do nothing to deter a criminal! James Galliver
Location: 91775, San Gabriel
Submitted At: 12:02pm 01-24-22
I strongly oppose this ordinance and urge to vote NO on this item. This ordinance would destroy 2nd Amendment rights. I am not a resident of San Jose, but as a resident of California and a U.S. citizen, I (and indeed every citizen) have an interest in a law that destroys our rights. This law does not combat gun violence; rather, it simply makes it more expensive for law abiding citizens from exercising their right. In effect, only the elite will be able to exercise their 2nd amendment rights.
Alexander Healey
Location: 95670, Rancho Cordova
Submitted At: 11:45am 01-24-22
Though I am not a resident of San Jose, I am compelled to voice my opposition of such a poorly conceived ordinance. The proposed ordinance is intentionally vague when it comes to fees that will be forced upon law- abiding firearms owners, which will encourage abuse and expansion of said fees. Like many other existing gun laws, this proposal carves out an exemption for LEOs in order to keep them in a stupor while constitutional rights are violated. Why are they exempt from "reducing gun harm?" Russell Failing
Location: 95123, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:52am 01-24-22
I strongly oppose the approval of the Gun Harm ordinance. This is an infringement of my Constitutional right under the 2nd amendment. Taxing a resident to exercise this right is a constitutional violation. My insurance company does not cover the city requirement. VOTE NO on Item 4.1.
Spend my tax dollars on crime fighting initiatives that will actually work. This ordinance won't!!! John Doe
Location:
Submitted At: 10:44am 01-24-22
This ordinance is completely unreasonable. Lawful gun owners do not commit crimes and therefore should not pay a tax to reduce criminal behavior. If the City wants to reduce crime, it should look at steps that would actually affect criminals. Criminals do not obtain guns legally so such a tax would not affect them.
Joshua Kaczmarek
Location:
Submitted At: 10:44am 01-24-22
This law does not combat gun violence in any meaningful way. It simply is an attempt to make it more expensive and to dissuade law abiding citizens from exercising their right to gun ownership and self protection. The city continues to funnel funds away from the police department and simultaneously making it move expensive and difficult to defend yourself all while violent crime is on the rise. This is not the way to confront criminal and gang related gun violence, by taxing law abiding citizens
Trevor Nunes
Location: 95133, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:27am 01-24-22
This is unconstitutional on its face. Any attempt to reduce gun violence through laws that only law abiding citizens will have no effect on gun violence in the city. Criminals have and will always break these laws. I vehemently oppose this proposal. It is a naked attempt to violate our second amendment rights, and whether you disagree with the right or not, the citizens have that right.
M H
Location: 95132, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:57am 01-24-22
This punishes lawful gun owners by spreading the cost of accidental or negligent discharges across many gun owners which have never had one.
What insurance policies exist which satisfy this requirement? John Smith
Location:
Submitted At: 9:56am 01-24-22
I am completely against this proposal. Complete violation of privacy and won't combat any gun violence.
Kevin Cerutti
Location: 05120, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:51am 01-24-22
I ask city council to OPPOSE This unconstitutional ordinance. 1: it will unfairly punish lawful and peaceful gun owners while having no impact on criminals. 2: it will not withstand legal scrutiny, and will be a waste of taxpayer money. 3: the ordinance does not specify the amount of the fee, how can you vote to enact a fee without knowing the amount?
4: No insurance exists to satisfy the requirements of this ordinance.
Florencia Nagita
Location:
Submitted At: 9:12am 01-24-22
Thanks for information! Search Engine Optimization (SEO) is a powerful idea of promoting company and its products and services on the internet. Of late, the number of internet users has been increased to the great extent so that it has become important to get your products and services promoted on the net. Let's visit my games website : <a href="https://13.213.182.248" title="https://13.213.182.248">MPO Slot</a> dan <a href="https://lotus99.co.uk/" title="LOTUS99">LOTUS99</a>
MARK EBERLE
Location: 95123, San Jose
Submitted At: 9:09am 01-24-22
San Jose city council I am oppose this ordinance and ask you to VOTE NO on Item 4.1 at the Tuesday, January 25th meeting. Legal safe gun owners are taxed enough with out this ordinance.
How about instead of creating more hoops to force law abiding citizens to jump through you focus on getting actual criminals and drug addicts off the streets to make our neighborhoods safer.
Gilbert Tavarez
Location: San Jose
Submitted At: 8:51am 01-24-22
I completely oppose the whole thing, first off California already has enough “gun tax” we don’t need more.
Secondly how is anyone supposed to get an insurance that covers negligent discharge when none do. How about instead of creating more hoops to force law abiding citizens to jump through you focus on getting actual criminals and drug addicts off the streets to make our neighborhoods safer.
Amanda a
Location: San Jose
Submitted At: 8:43am 01-24-22
Please OPPOSE this ordinance. It's not right to make legal safe gun owners pay for those who choose to not be safe. And those that you desire to target with this likely won't educate themselves on the ordinance or comply.
There are many local hobbyists in San Jose who go to activities such as trap and skeet shooting at local ranges.
The sport is already becoming more expensive and challenging to comply with all the CA laws. This would be another unfair burden on them.
Jacob Dean
Location: San Jose
Submitted At: 8:25am 01-24-22
Y ou cannot legislate away crime because criminals do not follow the law. This is an open attack on the right for the responsible law abiding citizens of this city to keep and bear arms and take personal responsibility for ones own safety, instead of leaving it in the hands of a governing body. Taking ones firearms before due process, is not due process. Voting on a law before the price tag is even deliberated is asinine. No insurance company would cover this; or make it ungodly expensive.
Vince Citizen
Location: 95111
Submitted At: 6:21am 01-24-22
Legal guns are not the problem.
Statistically gun owners commit less crime
Gun control laws do not deter crime; gun ownership deters crime. states with restrictions on the carrying of concealed weapons had higher gun-related murders Gun control laws will not prevent criminals from obtaining guns or breaking laws Gun control efforts have proved ineffective.
there is no correlation between waiting periods and murder or robbery rates. Or any other control efforts Daniel Velazco
Location: 95111, San Jose
Submitted At: 4:50am 01-24-22
I am minority, law-abiding US citizen that owns firearms to protect my family. - These policies will only affect law-abiding citizens like myself, we are being taxed for exercising our rights - Criminals will not be affected by this. They use unregistered and stolen weapons - The insurance required does not exist, no insurer will cover negligibility - SJPD can take minutes to respond to a call, and when your life is being threatened, you don't have minutes, you have seconds
- Unconstitutional
David XU
Location: 95112, San jose
Submitted At: 1:49am 01-24-22
I am a minority that saw a rise in hate crimes over the last 2 years and this is one of many wasteful, tone-dear, ignorant policies that punish those that pay taxes, contribute to society and seek to protect themselves. No such proposed insurance exists and this law does not address criminal violence the San Jose government happily overlooks. I will be taking my six figure tax revenue out of state this year, as I can no longer support a farce posing as a representative government
Richard Timpa
Location: 95124, San jose
Submitted At: 12:29am 01-24-22
This proposal ridiculous. We as citizens in this city should not be subject to these type of prohibited taxes and infringements. Why is it that if someone steals and unlawfully possesses a firearm they are simply slapped with a misdemeanor and goes about his merry way. It’s about time the city places higher penalties on true criminals and not infringe on honest citizens. Any councilmember willing to vote yes on this issue will definitely not get my vote ever.
Josh Guilbert
Location: 95136, San Jose
Submitted At: 11:08pm 01-23-22
My name is Josh Guilbert. I am a San Jose District 2 resident and ask city council to OPPOSE This unconstitutional ordinance.
1: it will unfairly punish lawful and peaceful gun owners while having no impact on criminals. 2: it will not withstand legal scrutiny, and will be a waste of taxpayer money. 3: the ordinance does not specify the amount of the fee, how can you vote to enact a fee without knowing the amount?
4: No insurance exists to satisfy the requirements of this ordinance.
Daniel R
Location:
Submitted At: 9:24pm 01-23-22
It is completely illogical to force people to pay this fee that is in a sense, a form of mass punishment through fees on gun owners. The same effect for most of this ordinance is already achieved through civil court cases that could punish someone monetarily due to their unlawful or negligent actions with firearms. Instead, this ordinance wants to punish every gun owner for the actions of few.
Kevin T
Location:
Submitted At: 9:00pm 01-23-22
No ty
N S
Location:
Submitted At: 8:42pm 01-23-22
Unconstitutional. Punish and charge the people who are breaking laws. hana mark
Location:
Submitted At: 8:41pm 01-23-22
This bill is ridiculous you guys need to rethink this https://snowrider3d.com Kyle Chiu
Location: 91006, Arcadia
Submitted At: 8:32pm 01-23-22
I strongly oppose this Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance as it does nothing but punish those that do not harm anyone. Every legally purchased firearm in this state, such as those this proposal seeks to add fees to, is registered. The weapons used in crimes are not registered, and therefore unable to be taxed because the state does not know about them. I would propose instead to increase punishments for violent gun crimes and make criminals that harm pay financially instead of people that do no harm.
KENNEDY VU
Location: 95131, San Jose
Submitted At: 8:17pm 01-23-22
Criminals are more likely to commit gun violence than those who actually spent time and money to go through California's background checks, restrictions, and various fees. We have people around the Bay Area in all walks of life who wish to exercise constitutional rights such as the 2nd Amendment, and this bill damns it and would try to make people deter away from guns as a financial loss rather than a right to defend themselves.
Ryan Parsons
Location: 93611, Clovis
Submitted At: 8:11pm 01-23-22
I oppose this ordinance due to the unconstitutionality of being forced to pay to exercise a constitutional right.
Alex Vallejo
Location: 91761, Riverside
Submitted At: 7:47pm 01-23-22
This bill is ridiculous you guys need to rethink this
Alex C
Location: 92507, Moreno Valley
Submitted At: 7:33pm 01-23-22
This is unconditional in my eyes.
Caleb Wu
Location:
Submitted At: 7:23pm 01-23-22
This is an unconstitutional and blatant attack on our civil rights.
Henry Doan
Location: 95111, San Jose
Submitted At: 7:01pm 01-23-22
As a San Jose lifelong resident, I strongly oppose this proposed legislation as directly violates and prevents my constitutional rights and my ability to protect myself and my family. Last week, my family has experienced an attempted break-in at home. It took over 40 minutes for the police to drive by and not check in with us. We still see the individual appear in our area weekly. This proposed legislation does not provide any meaningful impact in preventing crime or facilitating firearm safety.
Xing Zhang
Location: 95123, San Jose
Submitted At: 6:18pm 01-23-22
Owning firearms is a constitutional right
Free speech is a constitutional right
This is a direct violation of the constitution. Since when can San Jose require money for the right to exercise a constitutional right? How much do I have to pay to have free speech in San Jose? How much do I have to pay to have freedom of religion in San Jose? How much do i have to pay for my constitution rights in San Jose? Volha Sharanhovich
Location: 95127, San Jose
Submitted At: 5:34pm 01-23-22
I strongly oppose this attempt to punish law-abiding gun owners as they have nothing to do with gun violence, which is mostly committed by criminals. This ordinance will not be creating any problem for a criminal because a criminal gets the gun to use it, not to legally store it, thus additional fees will never be an issue for such a person.
Finn Doyle
Location: 95014, Cupertino
Submitted At: 5:09pm 01-23-22
City of San Jose,
This ordinance is a violation of the rights of the people to keep and bear arms. Holding gun owners responsible for crimes committed with firearms STOLEN from them is unconstitutional and wrong. Forcing them to "donate" money to an organization they might not agree with is wrong. This "insurance" helps noone be safer. Please vote against this ordinance to uphold peoples rights to defend themselves.
Jose Diaz
Location: 95118, San Jose
Submitted At: 4:54pm 01-23-22
I am against the implementation of the Gun Harm Reduction Oridanance due to its nature of burdening the people who have a constitutional right to posses and own firearms.
Samuel Wang
Location: 95111, San Jose
Submitted At: 3:59pm 01-23-22
I am against the implication of this law. Y ou do not infringe on the rights of American citizens. Y ou wouldn't put a tax or a fee on the freedom of speech, so there should be none on firearms either.
James Fang
Location: 95123, San Jose
Submitted At: 3:45pm 01-23-22
This Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance proposal is similar to how car insurance would work. Except owning a car and driving one is a privilege, not a right. Adding to that analogy, you wouldn't charge everyone a tax for drunk drivers right? Additionally, if this were passed it would be giving the city a blank paycheck to tax law abiding citizens who own firearms for any amount they want. Guns don't kill people, people kill people.
Tim Gutshall
Location:
Submitted At: 3:35pm 01-23-22
All this law this does is put more Road blocks in the way of good citizens. How is it due process to take your guns till you see if I have broken the law. Police officers time and time again have arrested people for in accurate info or proper training. This law is unethical and should be thrown out. This is un-American and against the constitution that you are to up hold as elected officials.
Juan Perez
Location: 95351, Modesto
Submitted At: 1:06pm 01-23-22
I am against the implementation of the Gun Harm Reduction Oridanance due to its nature of burdening the people who have a constitutional right to posses and own firearms. Further addition of hurdles for law abiding citizens will create an infringement on 2nd amendment rights. Amendment 2 states," A well regulated Malitia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Jay Keller
Location: 93703, Fresno
Submitted At: 1:00pm 01-23-22
Please don't enact an apartheid gun law. This will only affect and harass the legal firearm owners! What are you going to do if san jose resident's keep their firearms somewhere else in the state, and not in san jose? This is an illegal effort to harass and make legal firearm ownership ILLEGAL!! George Ybanez
Location: 95624, Elk Grove
Submitted At: 12:47pm 01-23-22
Y ou can't put a tax or a fee on a right. Y ou don't charge a fee or tax or require insurance for freedom of speach.
Michael Marsh
Location: 92117-3733, San Diego
Submitted At: 12:45pm 01-23-22
This proposal is another example of incredible overreach from elected officials in California. Any attempt to follow the logic of this idea falls short of understanding and existing law and precedent. This is a blatant assault on law abiding citizens and civil rights.
Amadeus OrnelasHibpshman
Location:
Submitted At: 12:16pm 01-23-22
This proposed action is an unlawful, unconstituional and unconsionable infringement on the rights of private citizens in the city of San Jose. It is clear that this proposal would not stand the test of any level of applied scrutiny in a court of law and is clearly being proposed as an additional barrier to gun ownership imposed on citizens in a county that has a reputation marked with corruption and disregard for the average citizen with regards to their second ammendment rights.
Nicholas Garrison
Location: 91006, Arcadia
Submitted At: 12:04pm 01-23-22
This is just as much of an infrindgement as everything else California does. It is illegal to tax or add fees to a constitutional right. This is literally illegal and no one in San Jose should be participating in compliance with this nonsense. All of you who proposed this should be removed from office, forcibly is need be.
Mathew Merritt
Location:
Submitted At: 11:30am 01-23-22
This is incredibly intrusive to the second amendment. Not only is it attempting to place a pseudo tax on the rights of the people, but it also attempts to extort them with additional fees. All of this is being potentially voted on without even placing an amount to the "fees". Besides this being obviously unconstitutional, it will also be driving out people from the city. Not just people that live there, but also potential visitors. There is quite literally no positive outcomes from passing this.
Jason Valenzuela
Location:
Submitted At: 11:14am 01-23-22
Are you serious? There is no way we are paying constant fees and taxes to keep and bare arms! Y ou are all idiotic, you claim that the poor will be exempt from these fees? Do you seriously not realize the poor are the people committing serious firearm crimes! How are you so blind to it! If you really cared about people not getting hurt by firearms, then maybe you should stop letting violent criminals out of prison so soon! Or maybe stop giving them little to nothing on bail.
Michael Lineback
Location: 95821, Sacramento
Submitted At: 11:05am 01-23-22
This ordinance is completely unreasonable. Lawful gun owners do not commit crimes and therefore should not pay a tax to reduce criminal behavior. If the City wants to reduce crime, it should look at steps that would actually affect criminals. Criminals do not obtain guns legally so such a tax would not affect them.
David Riley
Location:
Submitted At: 11:01am 01-23-22
The Second Amendment states, "Shall not be infringed." Everything the city is trying to do with gun control is against this amendment! Law abiding gun owners will have to pay for insurance, but the thieves, robbers, and murderers will be considered, "Poor" and unable to pay the fees to keep their guns that they use to violate others!? The city and mayor have reached a new level of tyrannical laws against their people. Vote no on this! It's 100 percent unconstitutional!!!!
Mike Oxhard
Location:
Submitted At: 10:44am 01-23-22
This ordinance is unconstitutional.
And the extra slap in the face is having to donate to a "harm reduction" program that will inevitably fight to alienate more law-abiding citizens rights
Christopher Castaneda
Location: 95126, San Jose
Submitted At: 10:44am 01-23-22
It is absurd the thought of paying insurance. Not alot of people can afford insurance in this current state of the pandemic. People just want to focus on feeding their family and make a living. Then people will get hit with an extra expense. While they could use that money for something good.
John Doe
Location:
Submitted At: 10:33am 01-23-22
The logic of reducing gun related harm by placing more fees upon the law abiding citizen is flawed. Gun owners that have done nothing wrong would be negatively effected by the hindrance of their right to keep and bear arms.
If this were to pass the targeted potential wrong doers would be further encouraged to obtain firearms illegally to avoid the city of San Jose's and the state of California's overly complex process of obtaining firearms. Not enough characters are provided to explain myself.
Kirk Vartan
Location:
Submitted At: 5:38pm 01-22-22
What happened to the original link with over 800 comments? Why did that break? Why is the city deliberately trying to silence the public? This is shameful behavior. Last I checked, over 800 comments were made in 24 hours and all but 5 were OPPOSE. And now the link they used is broken? Seems pretty suspicious. And very unacceptable. Very disappointed in how this process is being run.
Ordinance Unconstitutional
Location:
Submitted At: 1:17pm 01-22-22
ordinance unconstitutional.