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
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.