Sweeping new gun passing by the city of San Jose has caused a guns-rights group to file a lawsuit against them. The city, in turn, has argued it will reduce firearm-related incidents.

This lawsuit argues the new ordinance could lead to gun confiscation, a path it called “patently unconstitutional.”

Sweeping New Gun Bill – Unspecified fee by Gun Owners

“In fact, the City of San Jose has taken the first-ever step. It would thus require almost all gun owners within its city limits. Thus to pay unspecified sums of money to private insurance companies. An unspecified fee to an unidentified government-chosen non-profit. It would be simply to exercise their constitutional right to own a gun.” That is what the lawsuit read. It is filed by the National Association for Gun Rights Tuesday.

Liability Insurance, User Fees

On Tuesday, the bill that passed by the City of San Jose is going to require the gun owners to purchase liability insurance. Also, then pay “user fees” which the city does play to invest in “evidence-based initiatives that would reduce gun harm.”

“Moreover, tonight San Jose did become the first city in the United States to enact an ordinance. It would requiring the gun owners to purchase the liability insurance, then invest the funds which are generating from fees paid by guns owners into the evidence-basing initiatives. That would reduce gun violence and gun harm,” San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo did say in a statement on Tuesday.

Then the bill states the liability insurance mandate then “can reduce the number of gun incidents. This would be to encourage safer behavior, and plus it can also provide coverage for losses and damages related to gun incidents,” while the fees gun owners pay are helping the “reduce the number of gun incidents by encouraging safer behavior.”