NEW SAN JOSE
GUN LAW Examining the pros and cons of the new gun legislation SONIA PATIL
W
6 | THE PROSPECTOR
writer
ith the rise of gun violence in local areas, San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo has implemented some of the nation’s strongest gun-ownership requirements. Most notably, in January 2022, Liccardo put a liability insurance and fee requirement in place, stirring up a variety of responses– both opposed and in favor of the law. According to NBC Bay Area, “ B e tween 50,000 and 55,000 San Jose households own at least one gun.” The 2019 Gilroy Garlic Festival mass shooting was what first prompted Liccardo to develop stricter gun laws. The goal was to reduce gun violence and shift the financial burden of emergency response and victim services caused by firearms away from the general taxpayer and onto gun owners. As of 2021, San Jose residents pay an estimated $442 million in gun-related costs per year. Liccardo’s plans slowed with the COVID-19 pandemic, but the idea came back into full force after the mass shooting at the VTA light rail in May 2021. On January 25, 2022, Silicon Valley City Council approved the
insurance policy with a 10-1 vote, and the fee policy voted 8-3. The ordinance requires gun owners to carry liability insurance that covers damage caused by their weapons, and the fee requirement will be charged per household, not per gun. The ordinance has gained much support locally, said Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action, “Following unthinkable tragedies from gun violence, San José has taken action that will save lives.” However, despite local support, the law’s fee requirements have also faced much opposition. Said Sam Paredes in an interview with NPR, “Any way you put the lipstick on this pig, it is still a pig. It’s still wrong-headed. It is unconstitutional…the fee requirement will only create financial and bureaucratic burdens for legal gun owners.” Responding to such concerns in a separate interview, said Liccardo, “While the Second Amendment protects the right to bear arms, it does not require taxpayers to subsidize gun ownership. We won’t magically end gun violence, but we will stop paying for it. We can also better care for its victims, and reduce gun-related injuries and death through sensible interventions.” The proceeds from the fee requirement will fund a non-profit organization, yet to be established, that will focus on gun crime prevention and provide aid to victims of gun violence. The insurance requirement of the law has been met with dispute as well,
