San Jose gun owners could be required to purchase liability insurance

[sealybobo]

We're talking what's Constitutional, Last I checked abortion is not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution.

Neither is dressing like a woman it still is a right.

 

[sealybobo]

That's called interpretation.

Interesting you say that. Did you hear Sotomayor's interview yesterday?

Sotomayor: It’s a mistake to believe ‘the law is clear’ in Supreme Court cases

Justice Sonia Sotomayor says “the biggest misconception people have” when Supreme Court rulings are weighed and handed down is that “the law is clear” to begin with.“Mo…

thehill.com

 

[Ringel05]

Neither is dressing like a woman it still is a right.

I'm not arguing pro or anti with either simply stating it's not in specifically written in the Constitution or Bill of Rights. It's also not germane to the subject of the Constitutionality of firearms laws.

 

[sealybobo]

I'm not arguing pro or anti with either simply stating it's not in specifically written in the Constitution or Bill of Rights. It's also not germane to the subject of the Constitutionality of firearms laws.

You know there is a line on the 2nd amendment right? Can you own a nuclear weapon? And Clinton signed an assault weapon ban. Turns out it was constitutional because it happened.

 

[Ringel05]

Interesting you say that. Did you hear Sotomayor's interview yesterday?

Sotomayor: It’s a mistake to believe ‘the law is clear’ in Supreme Court cases

Justice Sonia Sotomayor says “the biggest misconception people have” when Supreme Court rulings are weighed and handed down is that “the law is clear” to begin with.“Mo…

thehill.com

No but to me it looks to be the age old lawyer trick of obfuscation.

 

[sealybobo]

No but to me it looks to be the age old lawyer trick of obfuscation.

She's right though. If the law was obvious, it wouldn't be constantly challenged. What Ron Paul thinks is constitutional is not the same was what Hillary thinks. Or Bush. Or Trump. Or Obama. They have all done unconstitutional things. Just ask the other party.

 

[Ringel05]

She's right though. If the law was obvious, it wouldn't be constantly challenged. What Ron Paul thinks is constitutional is not the same was what Hillary thinks. Or Bush. Or Trump. Or Obama. They have all done unconstitutional things. Just ask the other party.

That's due to individual or group interpretation that has been going on since the Constitution was ratified. The problem is it's been over interpreted too often by too many people which has muddied up the key component of all Constitutional law, Original Intent. I think what she was referring to is how narrow rulings can be seen by some as clear and all encompassing, they're more often not all encompassing.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Without even looking at any content herein, I'm going with "no" it's not constitutional.

How'd I do?

Fail.

The courts have upheld as Constitutional licensing and permit fees, that they do not manifest as an undue burden to the Second Amendment right.

‘In a recent decision, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York upheld portions of the New York City Administrative Code requiring New York City residents to pay a $340 fee to apply for a New York City “Premises Residence” handgun license, which allows the license holder to possess handguns within a specified dwelling. In the matter of Kwong v. Bloomberg, plaintiffs, a group of New York City handgun owners, challenged this fee on the grounds that it unconstitutionally burdened their Second Amendment rights to keep and bear arms. The Court, however, upheld the fee because it was designed to defray the administrative costs of the licensing scheme and the amount was not so excessive such that it would likely deter an individual from exercising his or her Second Amendment rights. The Court further found that the fee passed muster when subjected to a means-end scrutiny, determining that it was substantially related to promoting substantial or important governmental objectives: public safety and the prevention of gun violence.’

Federal Court Upholds New York City Gun Licensing and Fee Regulations | Renzulli Law Firm

renzullilaw.com

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It probably will get thrown out by the courts at some point.

Or not.

Other rights are subject to fees which are perfectly Constitutional:

“The government may require modest content-neutral fees for demonstration permits or charitable fundraising permits, at least if the fees are tailored to defraying the costs of administering constitutionally permissible regulatory regimes.
[…]
The same is true for marriage license fees and filing fees for political candidates…of costs involved in getting permits to build on your own property, a right protected by the Takings Clause….”

Gun License Fees and the Right to Keep and Bear Arms for Self-Defense - The Volokh Conspiracy

After McDonald, and the newly enacted Chicago handgun ordinance, people are again turning to whether and when gun license fees are unconstitutional. I’ve heard some argue that under existing constitutional rules applicable to other rights — especially the First Amendment — any fee for the...

volokh.com

The issue therefore is not the cost of liability insurance and the annual fee per se – but whether those costs are un-Constitutionally excessive.

 

[martybegan]

The pursuit of happiness.

Nope, try again.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Fail.
The courts have upheld as Constitutional licensing and permit fees, that they do not manifest as an undue burden to the Second Amendment right.

Imagine your pissing and moaning, should some jurisdiction place the same permit requirement on the right to have an abortion.

Tell us again why you believe the TX abortion law is constitutional.

 

[2aguy]

You know there is a line on the 2nd amendment right? Can you own a nuclear weapon? And Clinton signed an assault weapon ban. Turns out it was constitutional because it happened.

No.,....it was never challenged in the Supreme Court....no one wanted to risk the chance a Republican squish on the court would rule the wrong way.

 

[2aguy]

Imagine your pissing and moaning, should some jurisdiction place the same permit requirement on the right to have an abortion.

Tell us again why you believe the TX abortion law is constitutional.

I think, according to their logic....that anyone who wants to be a journalist, a writer, a blogger, should have to pay a fee, and get a permit from the government.....otherwise, they won't be allowed to write anything........

They should also have liability insurance against Libel, and Slander before they can submit anything.......and to that....each time they write something, they should have to submit it to the government and be charged a fee .....based on the number of words or letters, to be worked out later...

You can write anything you want.....once you pay for an acquire the appropriate permit....

No one says you can't be a journalist, we just need to know you have a permit for it...

 

[M14 Shooter]

You know there is a line on the 2nd amendment right?

Indeed. "Bearable arms" -- those firearms in common use for traditionally lawful purposes.
Where do you think that draws the line, and why?

And Clinton signed an assault weapon ban. Turns out it was constitutional because it happened.

Just like the abortion law in TX.

 

[Otis Mayfield]

You can't give loaded firearms to 100% of the population.

We don't want little kids waving loaded pistols around.

We don't want maniacs to have guns.

There's a law against felons owning guns.

So, you can't take the Second Amendment literally, because a lot of people aren't allowed guns.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You can't give loaded firearms to 100% of the population.
We don't want little kids waving loaded pistols around.
We don't want maniacs to have guns.
There's a law against felons owning guns.
So, you can't take the Second Amendment literally, because a lot of people aren't allowed guns.

Not everyone falls under "the people", just like not every weapon falls under "arms".
So, you -can- take it literally, you just have to understand the terms used.

 

[Otis Mayfield]

Not everyone falls under "the people", just like not every weapon falls under "arms".
So, you -can- take it literally, you just have to understand the terms used.

I won't argue that point with you.

But at one time, "everyone" would've been white males who owned property.

Now "everyone" includes blacks, women, etc.

true?

 

[M14 Shooter]

I won't argue that point with you.
But at one time, "everyone" would've been white males who owned property.
Now "everyone" includes blacks, women, etc.
true?

Sure. So?

 

[sealybobo]

Indeed. "Bearable arms" -- those firearms in common use for traditionally lawful purposes.
Where do you think that draws the line, and why?

Just like the abortion law in TX.

Any weapon the military has, you want. Or else you are at a disadvantage. Isn't that right?

 

[westwall]

San Jose gun owners could be required to purchase liability insurance and pay an annual fee on their weapons under an ordinance the city council is expected to approve this week.

The proposed ordinance would require gun owners to pay an annual fee of roughly $25 as well as administrative costs to the city. Gun owners would also be required to maintain liability insurance in the event their gun is used for violence or a crime.

Mayor Sam Liccardo, who introduced the two proposals last June after a Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority employee killed nine of his co-workers and himself, likened the insurance requirement to motorists having car insurance.

Tuesday Morning News Roundup

San Jose gun owners could be required to purchase liability insurance and pay an annual...

www.sfgate.com

The mass shooter who spawned this law was a well-paid, law-abiding employee up until the point he went apeshit and shot dead 9 of his coworkers.

He would've just bought the insurance.

Or maybe that's what the law is for? To provide compensation to the victims?

Doesn't make much sense to me.

Unconstitutional and i would file a Civil RICO against the assholes who voted for it. Bankrupt the pricks so the next jackasses think twice.