Meeting: City Council

Meeting Time: January 25, 2022 at 1:30pm PST
The online Comment window has expired

Agenda Item

4.1 22-045 Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance. - TO BE HEARD AT 6:00 P.M.

  • Default_avatar
    George Anderson over 4 years ago

    Violates our right to bare arms.

  • Default_avatar
    Yaochun Chiang over 4 years ago

    If law enforcement can not protect civilian, do not restrict our rights to protect our family.

  • Default_avatar
    Hung Huynh over 4 years ago

    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!

  • Default_avatar
    Joshua Marcus over 4 years ago

    Do it pass this. This is an infringement on the second amendment.

  • Default_avatar
    Chris Giangreco over 4 years ago

    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.

  • Default_avatar
    B T over 4 years ago

    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.

  • Default_avatar
    Eric Lam over 4 years ago

    I vehemently oppose this.

  • Default_avatar
    John Saunders over 4 years ago

    Lawful and responsible gun owners should NOT be liable for the bad deeds of outlaws.

  • Default_avatar
    Scott Small over 4 years ago

    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

  • Default_avatar
    Shi Cheng over 4 years ago

    Any restriction to limit a citizen’s lawful right to own a firearm is strongly opposed and
    condemned.

  • Default_avatar
    Luigi Covelli over 4 years ago

    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.

  • Default_avatar
    Marvin Hammer over 4 years ago

    This law will have no affect on the criminal element and a negative effect on law abiding citizen. Please don't pass this tax.

  • Default_avatar
    Yanhuan Cheng over 4 years ago

    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.

  • Default_avatar
    Steve Peck over 4 years ago

    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.

  • Default_avatar
    Larry Evans over 4 years ago

    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.

    You are making yourselves look like idiots. Either do something really constructive or go find a job you are better suited for!

  • Default_avatar
    Shannon Huestis over 4 years ago

    I oppose this ordinance, you shouldn't be required to pay additional fees for the firearms you own or plan to buy.

  • Default_avatar
    Qiang Lin over 4 years ago

    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.

  • Default_avatar
    Michelle Marcus over 4 years ago

    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 STRONLY OPPOSE THIS PROPOSED ORDINANCE! The 2nd Amendment shall not be infringed and this is exactly what the city is attempting to do.

  • Default_avatar
    William Akin over 4 years ago

    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...

  • Default_avatar
    J S over 4 years ago

    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.