In a move that is being celebrated by the anti-gun crowd, the government of San Jose, California has passed a resolution — unanimously — to force gun owners to pay an annual tax and carry insurance for the privilege of self-defense.
Though the forthcoming tax has yet to be determined, lawmakers have already determined that they will begin confiscating guns from anyone who refuses to pay it.
This move comes on the heels of another Orwellian gun law the city passed two weeks ago which requires every single gun purchase to be video and audio recorded and that media stored indefinitely.
The city claims the gun tax is necessary to force gun owners to cover the costs related to gun violence in the city. Given the fact that most gun crimes are not committed by law-abiding gun owners, this measure is little more than an attack on legal guns.
Naturally, this has gun rights activists up in arms and they are promising to take the city of San Jose to court if they follow through with the measure.
“The whole proposal is completely disingenuous. It fails to provide any proven solutions. It is blatantly unconstitutional,” San Jose resident Dave Truslow, a National Rifle Association firearm instructor, told the San Jose Spotlight. “In the meantime, (Mayor Sam Liccardo) is hoping to bask in the sunlight.”
Another valid point brought up by those who oppose this new law is the fact that — like most taxes, fines, or monetary requirements — it targets poor people. For those who can afford to pay, it won’t be that big of a burden but for those who can’t afford it, they will be forced to turn in their guns or become criminals overnight.
It appears this is a back-door means of disarming the city’s poor population.
“What these measures really do is penalize the less affluent,” Truslow said.
According to the San Jose Spotlight, Truslow is concerned that there are no measures to address issues that drive crime, including increasing the number of San Jose police officers, pursuing unlawful possession of guns, constructing a city jail for those who violate Santa Clara County’s sanctuary policy, more effective gang intervention programs and workplace violence training for public employees. He wants the city to address crime instead of Liccardo’s gun measures.
Sam Paredes, executive director of gun rights policy group Gun Owners of California, told the Mercury News last month that Liccardo would “have his rear end handed to him in a basket by a judge.”
“We think that the mayor must have aspirations to be king or something because his proposals are not allowed under federal or state law because of the constitution on the federal side and the preemption law on the state side,” Paredes told San José Spotlight.
Paredes also brought up the totalitarian undertones of enforcing this gun tax and notes that the only way to do it will be violating the rights of individuals.
“What is his solution? Is he going door-to-door, knocking on people’s homes and saying, ‘Do you own guns and where are they?’” Paredes said. “That would be a very, very bad idea, and would be reminiscent of some very bad periods of history, going all the way back to pre-World War II—what Germany did in Poland and even the unreasonable acts of government in the Japanese internment camps.”
