Taxation without Representation?

[Auld Phart]

Will this make it to the Supreme Court?

San Jose Will Force Gun Owners to Cover Costs of Gun Violence After Mass Shooting

Reuters/Peter DaSilvaJust five weeks after last month’s massacre at a San Jose light-rail yard that left nine people dead, the city has taken unprecedented gun-control action.In a unanimous vote Tuesday night, San Jose’s city council approved a national first that will see gun owners being...

www.yahoo.com

San Jose Will Force Gun Owners to Cover Costs of Gun Violence After Mass Shooting​

"
Jamie Ross
Wed, June 30, 2021, 10:35 AM·2 min read

Reuters/Peter DaSilva
Just five weeks after last month’s massacre at a San Jose light-rail yard that left nine people dead, the city has taken unprecedented gun-control action.
In a unanimous vote Tuesday night, San Jose’s city council approved a national first that will see gun owners being forced to compensate taxpayers for the spiraling costs of gun violence. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, gun owners in California’s third-largest city will be required to take out liability insurance for their firearms, and pay an annual tax that will help fund emergency responses to gun-related calls."

 

[mdk]

No, it should rightfully be laughed out of court at the lowers level and they likely won't bother to hear it if it does.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

San Jose’s city council approved a national first that will see gun owners being forced to compensate taxpayers for the spiraling costs of gun violence.

That is awesome!!!!

How will they be collecting from the criminal gun owners with unregistered weapons?

 

[Moonglow]

San Jose’s city council approved a national first that will see gun owners being forced to compensate taxpayers for the spiraling costs of gun violence.

That is awesome!!!!

How will they be collecting from the criminal gun owners with unregistered weapons?

Sales tax increase.

 

[Concerned American]

No, it should rightfully be laughed out of court at the lowers level and they likely won't bother to hear it if it does.

Clearly an infringement on a person's right to keep and bear arms. SCOTUS will overrule it.

 

[Votto]

Will this make it to the Supreme Court?

San Jose Will Force Gun Owners to Cover Costs of Gun Violence After Mass Shooting

Reuters/Peter DaSilvaJust five weeks after last month’s massacre at a San Jose light-rail yard that left nine people dead, the city has taken unprecedented gun-control action.In a unanimous vote Tuesday night, San Jose’s city council approved a national first that will see gun owners being...

www.yahoo.com

San Jose Will Force Gun Owners to Cover Costs of Gun Violence After Mass Shooting​

"
Jamie Ross
Wed, June 30, 2021, 10:35 AM·2 min read

Reuters/Peter DaSilva
Just five weeks after last month’s massacre at a San Jose light-rail yard that left nine people dead, the city has taken unprecedented gun-control action.
In a unanimous vote Tuesday night, San Jose’s city council approved a national first that will see gun owners being forced to compensate taxpayers for the spiraling costs of gun violence. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, gun owners in California’s third-largest city will be required to take out liability insurance for their firearms, and pay an annual tax that will help fund emergency responses to gun-related calls."

The Left won't be happy until all guns are unregistered and illegal.

 

[task0778]

I think The San Jose decision will assuredly face a court challenge in the near future, and the losing side will appeal the case all the way to the SCOTUS. Whether they will hear the case is another story, if they agree with the lower court ruling than they may let it slide. But I can't believe this is constitutional, even in California.

 

[2aguy]

Will this make it to the Supreme Court?

San Jose Will Force Gun Owners to Cover Costs of Gun Violence After Mass Shooting

Reuters/Peter DaSilvaJust five weeks after last month’s massacre at a San Jose light-rail yard that left nine people dead, the city has taken unprecedented gun-control action.In a unanimous vote Tuesday night, San Jose’s city council approved a national first that will see gun owners being...

www.yahoo.com

San Jose Will Force Gun Owners to Cover Costs of Gun Violence After Mass Shooting​

"
Jamie Ross
Wed, June 30, 2021, 10:35 AM·2 min read

Reuters/Peter DaSilva
Just five weeks after last month’s massacre at a San Jose light-rail yard that left nine people dead, the city has taken unprecedented gun-control action.
In a unanimous vote Tuesday night, San Jose’s city council approved a national first that will see gun owners being forced to compensate taxpayers for the spiraling costs of gun violence. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, gun owners in California’s third-largest city will be required to take out liability insurance for their firearms, and pay an annual tax that will help fund emergency responses to gun-related calls."

Unconstitutional.....

Murdock v Pennsylvania....

Murdock v. Pennsylvania 319 U.S. 105 (1943)

Held:
- A municipal ordinance which, as construed and applied, requires religious colporteurs to pay a license tax as a condition to the pursuit of their activities, is invalid under the Federal Constitution as a denial of freedom of speech, press and religion.

- A State may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution.

- The flat license tax here involved restrains in advance the Constitutional liberties of press and religion, and inevitably tends to suppress their exercise

Opinion:
...It is contended, however, that the fact that the license tax can suppress or control this activity is unimportant if it does not do so. But that is to disregard the nature of this tax. It is a license tax -- a flat tax imposed on the exercise of a privilege granted by the Bill of Rights. A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution....


... The power to impose a license tax on the exercise of these freedoms is indeed as potent as the power of censorship which this Court has repeatedly struck down...
... It is a flat license tax levied and collected as a condition to the pursuit of activities whose enjoyment is guaranteed by the First Amendment. Accordingly, it restrains in advance those constitutional liberties of press and religion, and inevitably tends to suppress their exercise...
Murdock v. Pennsylvania 319 U.S. 105 (1943)

 

[Rye Catcher]

Will this make it to the Supreme Court?

San Jose Will Force Gun Owners to Cover Costs of Gun Violence After Mass Shooting

Reuters/Peter DaSilvaJust five weeks after last month’s massacre at a San Jose light-rail yard that left nine people dead, the city has taken unprecedented gun-control action.In a unanimous vote Tuesday night, San Jose’s city council approved a national first that will see gun owners being...

www.yahoo.com

San Jose Will Force Gun Owners to Cover Costs of Gun Violence After Mass Shooting​

"
Jamie Ross
Wed, June 30, 2021, 10:35 AM·2 min read

Reuters/Peter DaSilva
Just five weeks after last month’s massacre at a San Jose light-rail yard that left nine people dead, the city has taken unprecedented gun-control action.
In a unanimous vote Tuesday night, San Jose’s city council approved a national first that will see gun owners being forced to compensate taxpayers for the spiraling costs of gun violence. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, gun owners in California’s third-largest city will be required to take out liability insurance for their firearms, and pay an annual tax that will help fund emergency responses to gun-related calls."

Seems to me, people pay for home insurance, rental insurance, umbrella insurance, car insurance and some UE Insurance, and many never see a dime from any claim. Why not gun insurance? Oh yeah, these fatal four words: "shall not be infringed".

 

[Auld Phart]

Think those owning illegal firearms are going to take out an insurance policy?

Crips, Bloods, etc?

 

[Rye Catcher]

Think those owning illegal firearms are going to take out an insurance policy?

Crips, Bloods, etc?

"Crips, Bloods" and etc.? You biases are noted.

That said it's likely that every demographic has persons who own, possess and have in their custody firearms. Most are sane, sober and law abiding citizens. Many are not, and the only way to provide a little more safety within the United States and its territories is to build a national data base wherein every law enforcement agency*** reports to this data base any contact of those who are arrested for any crime of violence (felony or misdemeanor), any evidence of being detained civilly as a danger to themselves or others, and any evidence that they are addicted to alcohol or illicit drugs.

***this includes all Federal, State LE Agencies; local police and sheriff agencies; all prosecutors who have indicted for crimes noted above; all psychologists, psychiatrists or social worker, probation or parole agent, who believe a person is a danger as noted above, and any clerk of the court when a defendant is placed on Probation and the terms and conditions of said release prohibits the ownership, possession or custody and control a firearm or any deadly weapon; and any person who has been identified as a member of a criminal gang.

 

[Blues Man]

100% unconstitutional

 

[Rye Catcher]

100% unconstitutional

Huh?

 

[Wyatt earp]

Will this make it to the Supreme Court?

San Jose Will Force Gun Owners to Cover Costs of Gun Violence After Mass Shooting

Reuters/Peter DaSilvaJust five weeks after last month’s massacre at a San Jose light-rail yard that left nine people dead, the city has taken unprecedented gun-control action.In a unanimous vote Tuesday night, San Jose’s city council approved a national first that will see gun owners being...

www.yahoo.com

San Jose Will Force Gun Owners to Cover Costs of Gun Violence After Mass Shooting​

"
Jamie Ross
Wed, June 30, 2021, 10:35 AM·2 min read

Reuters/Peter DaSilva
Just five weeks after last month’s massacre at a San Jose light-rail yard that left nine people dead, the city has taken unprecedented gun-control action.
In a unanimous vote Tuesday night, San Jose’s city council approved a national first that will see gun owners being forced to compensate taxpayers for the spiraling costs of gun violence. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, gun owners in California’s third-largest city will be required to take out liability insurance for their firearms, and pay an annual tax that will help fund emergency responses to gun-related calls."

Seems to me, people pay for home insurance, rental insurance, umbrella insurance, car insurance and some UE Insurance, and many never see a dime from any claim. Why not gun insurance? Oh yeah, these fatal four words: "shall not be infringed".

You clearly don't understand the constitution do you?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Will this make it to the Supreme Court?

San Jose Will Force Gun Owners to Cover Costs of Gun Violence After Mass Shooting

Reuters/Peter DaSilvaJust five weeks after last month’s massacre at a San Jose light-rail yard that left nine people dead, the city has taken unprecedented gun-control action.In a unanimous vote Tuesday night, San Jose’s city council approved a national first that will see gun owners being...

www.yahoo.com

San Jose Will Force Gun Owners to Cover Costs of Gun Violence After Mass Shooting​

"
Jamie Ross
Wed, June 30, 2021, 10:35 AM·2 min read

Reuters/Peter DaSilva
Just five weeks after last month’s massacre at a San Jose light-rail yard that left nine people dead, the city has taken unprecedented gun-control action.
In a unanimous vote Tuesday night, San Jose’s city council approved a national first that will see gun owners being forced to compensate taxpayers for the spiraling costs of gun violence. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, gun owners in California’s third-largest city will be required to take out liability insurance for their firearms, and pay an annual tax that will help fund emergency responses to gun-related calls."

Seems to me, people pay for home insurance, rental insurance, umbrella insurance, car insurance and some UE Insurance, and many never see a dime from any claim. Why not gun insurance? Oh yeah, these fatal four words: "shall not be infringed".

And NONE of those policies are intended to cover the INTENTIONAL actions of a third party.

NEXT

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Will this make it to the Supreme Court?

San Jose Will Force Gun Owners to Cover Costs of Gun Violence After Mass Shooting

Reuters/Peter DaSilvaJust five weeks after last month’s massacre at a San Jose light-rail yard that left nine people dead, the city has taken unprecedented gun-control action.In a unanimous vote Tuesday night, San Jose’s city council approved a national first that will see gun owners being...

www.yahoo.com

San Jose Will Force Gun Owners to Cover Costs of Gun Violence After Mass Shooting​

"
Jamie Ross
Wed, June 30, 2021, 10:35 AM·2 min read

Reuters/Peter DaSilva
Just five weeks after last month’s massacre at a San Jose light-rail yard that left nine people dead, the city has taken unprecedented gun-control action.
In a unanimous vote Tuesday night, San Jose’s city council approved a national first that will see gun owners being forced to compensate taxpayers for the spiraling costs of gun violence. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, gun owners in California’s third-largest city will be required to take out liability insurance for their firearms, and pay an annual tax that will help fund emergency responses to gun-related calls."

Seems to me, people pay for home insurance, rental insurance, umbrella insurance, car insurance and some UE Insurance, and many never see a dime from any claim. Why not gun insurance? Oh yeah, these fatal four words: "shall not be infringed".

You clearly don't understand the constitution do you?

...nor insurance.

 

[Rye Catcher]

Will this make it to the Supreme Court?

San Jose Will Force Gun Owners to Cover Costs of Gun Violence After Mass Shooting

Reuters/Peter DaSilvaJust five weeks after last month’s massacre at a San Jose light-rail yard that left nine people dead, the city has taken unprecedented gun-control action.In a unanimous vote Tuesday night, San Jose’s city council approved a national first that will see gun owners being...

www.yahoo.com

San Jose Will Force Gun Owners to Cover Costs of Gun Violence After Mass Shooting​

"
Jamie Ross
Wed, June 30, 2021, 10:35 AM·2 min read

Reuters/Peter DaSilva
Just five weeks after last month’s massacre at a San Jose light-rail yard that left nine people dead, the city has taken unprecedented gun-control action.
In a unanimous vote Tuesday night, San Jose’s city council approved a national first that will see gun owners being forced to compensate taxpayers for the spiraling costs of gun violence. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, gun owners in California’s third-largest city will be required to take out liability insurance for their firearms, and pay an annual tax that will help fund emergency responses to gun-related calls."

Seems to me, people pay for home insurance, rental insurance, umbrella insurance, car insurance and some UE Insurance, and many never see a dime from any claim. Why not gun insurance? Oh yeah, these fatal four words: "shall not be infringed".

And NONE of those policies are intended to cover the INTENTIONAL actions of a third party.

NEXT

You missed the point entirely. Civil Actions are settled everyday when mens rea is not proved. Consider the sale of a firearm, does the seller have a duty to make sure the buyer will not murder someone, or leave a gun on a table for a child to kill themselves or others accidently? A seller has a duty to use due diligence before selling a gun or giving a gun to another, IMO.

 

[Auld Phart]

Consider the sale of a firearm, does the seller have a duty to make sure the buyer will not murder someone, or leave a gun on a table for a child to kill themselves or others accidently?

Uh...

no

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Will this make it to the Supreme Court?

San Jose Will Force Gun Owners to Cover Costs of Gun Violence After Mass Shooting

Reuters/Peter DaSilvaJust five weeks after last month’s massacre at a San Jose light-rail yard that left nine people dead, the city has taken unprecedented gun-control action.In a unanimous vote Tuesday night, San Jose’s city council approved a national first that will see gun owners being...

www.yahoo.com

San Jose Will Force Gun Owners to Cover Costs of Gun Violence After Mass Shooting​

"
Jamie Ross
Wed, June 30, 2021, 10:35 AM·2 min read

Reuters/Peter DaSilva
Just five weeks after last month’s massacre at a San Jose light-rail yard that left nine people dead, the city has taken unprecedented gun-control action.
In a unanimous vote Tuesday night, San Jose’s city council approved a national first that will see gun owners being forced to compensate taxpayers for the spiraling costs of gun violence. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, gun owners in California’s third-largest city will be required to take out liability insurance for their firearms, and pay an annual tax that will help fund emergency responses to gun-related calls."

Seems to me, people pay for home insurance, rental insurance, umbrella insurance, car insurance and some UE Insurance, and many never see a dime from any claim. Why not gun insurance? Oh yeah, these fatal four words: "shall not be infringed".

And NONE of those policies are intended to cover the INTENTIONAL actions of a third party.

NEXT

You missed the point entirely. Civil Actions are settled everyday when mens rea is not proved. Consider the sale of a firearm, does the seller have a duty to make sure the buyer will not murder someone, or leave a gun on a table for a child to kill themselves or others accidently? A seller has a duty to use due diligence before selling a gun or giving a gun to another, IMO.

You need to go back to law school. Learn about subsequent intervening or superseding causes.

Then, go to insurance school and learn about the insurability for the criminal actions of others. When your ignorant ass is done with that, go fuck yourself and lick a dog's balls.

 

[DBA]

And so it begins. Nothing prevents them from simply making the tax unaffordable, thus removing guns from law-abiding citizens. Obviously, this won't affect criminals with guns.

San Jose to tax gun owners, will confiscate firearms for noncompliance