Blanket Anti-Gun Law Went Into Effect January 1: We Can't Let This Spread


A new anti-gun law went into effect on New Year’s Day in one California city, and it is effectively a blanket anti-gun law.

According to NBC Bay Area, the new law in the city of San Jose requires that all gun owners have proof of insurance covering accidents involving firearms, and it also requires that gun owners pay an annual $25 fee to the city.

The new law applies to all gun owners in the city of San Jose, regardless of what type of gun they own.

Mayor Sam Liccardo likened the new ordinance to auto insurance, saying, “We think that insurance is a particularly effective tool to reduce the harm that results from negligent or reckless use of guns in the same way that we’ve seen insurance be very effective in reducing auto-related deaths.”

Campus Insurance Services president Erik Dandurand said that it will not be hard for people to get insurance as most homeowner and renter insurance policies already have the coverage that is required by the new law.

Pro-Palestinian Agitators Attempting to Block Miami Road Find Out Things Are Different in Florida

“Because these policies include a coverage called comprehensive personal liability, and it covers pretty much anything that can happen that you can be liable for here and around the world,” Dandurand told NBC Bay Area.

Yet not everyone sees the new law this way. Many gun owners groups have voiced their opposition to the new law, saying that the insurance requirement and annual fees will be an onerous burden on low-income gun owners.

Essentially, this bill is a backdoor way for California leftists to make gun ownership unaffordable for low-income people, who cannot afford the costly insurance or pay the $25 annual fee.

So while it is true that this new law does not ban guns in San Jose outright, it serves as a sneaky way for the left to implement their unconstitutional agenda.

Should this law be challenged in court?

And while right now it is only one city, this new law could become a model for other leftist cities and states desperate to find a way to pass anti-gun legislation.

It is therefore imperative that this law is challenged in court because otherwise, other parts of the country might think that they can get away with it as well.

The San Jose law is indicative of a national trend. The last year saw the passage or introduction of several new laws that were basically backdoor gun bans, due to either vague statutes or onerous bureaucracy.

For instance, in the 2022 midterms, voters in Oregon voted to pass Measure 114, which requires police to maintain an electronic database of firearms permits, collect fingerprints from people before issuing permits, and conduct hands-on firearms training.

This law essentially requires people to jump through several hoops in order to obtain a gun permit, and it means that many people who do not have the time or money to meet these requirements will simply not be able to own a firearm.

Man Pulls Gun on Carjacker, Ends Up Dead in Harrowing Turn of Events

Meanwhile, Democrats in Michigan introduced HB 6544, which would ban “assault weapons.” But the definition of “assault weapon” laid out in the bill is very vague and could be used to justify the banning of almost any weapon.

Make no mistake, the Democrats are bent on banning firearms. It is time that we call these new laws what they are, sneaky ways by the far left to subvert the Second Amendment.

Truth and Accuracy

Submit a Correction →

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

, , , ,
Peter Partoll is a commentary writer for the Western Journal and a Research Assistant for the Catholic Herald. He earned his bachelor's degree at Hillsdale College and recently finished up his masters degree at Royal Holloway University of London. You can follow him on Twitter at @p_partoll.