# San Jose CA gun tax law is a positive first step to rational gun ownership **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 1, 2021, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/san-jose-ca-gun-tax-law-is-a-positive-first-step-to-rational-gun-ownership/945433 "2021-07-01T15:14:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 20
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2022, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/san-jose-ca-gun-tax-law-is-a-positive-first-step-to-rational-gun-ownership/945433/381 "2022-02-18T03:40:59Z")
He is right, they don’t do a good job. So I have proposed some that will, and so has Biden. ---
**Author:** ![Chingon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chingon/32/17645_2.png) [@Chingon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chingon)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2022, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/san-jose-ca-gun-tax-law-is-a-positive-first-step-to-rational-gun-ownership/945433/382 "2022-02-18T04:34:57Z")
I’m saying you’re right. There is no possible compromise, any measure to restrict unfettered access to guns will inevitably lead to mass banning of all guns. ---
**Author:** ![Chingon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chingon/32/17645_2.png) [@Chingon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chingon)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2022, 4:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/san-jose-ca-gun-tax-law-is-a-positive-first-step-to-rational-gun-ownership/945433/383 "2022-02-18T04:47:40Z")
Tell us exactly what legislation you would support (link to proposed bills, executive orders, etc) — not just the hand-waving vagary you claim to now. That way when they actually get proposed or have a snowballs chance in hell of getting passed and you suddenly decide they’re draconian gun-grabbing attempts we will have it on record that you weren’t serious in the first place. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2022, 5:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/san-jose-ca-gun-tax-law-is-a-positive-first-step-to-rational-gun-ownership/945433/384 "2022-02-18T05:05:21Z")
I have done so in the past. And saying i support Bidens plans is pretty much two clicks away. > **[Fact Sheet: Biden-Harris Administration Announces Comprehensive Strategy to...](https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/06/23/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-comprehensive-strategy-to-prevent-and-respond-to-gun-crime-and-ensure-public-safety/)** > > President Biden believes that the surge in gun violence that has affected communities across the country over the last year and a half is unacceptable, But here are two others Increased and better background checks. All sales must have a background check (some exclusions for sales to family members, police, etc) Define “dealer” so that the “straw man” who buys 20 guns then resells them to criminals has committed felonies. If you sell so many guns (12?) a year (not relics) you are dealer and have to do background checks and collect form 4473 on each sale. Anyone who buys more than some smaller number (3?) from any dealer they must report that to the FBI. Mots guns used by criminals are first bought legally from a dealer by a straw man, who then resells them under the counter to criminals. We would put a stop to that. Sure a dude could buy one gun and resell it. Still, he’d need a background check on all sales. **Now, tell us exactly what legislation you want.** The San Jose law is a draconian gun-grabbing attempt. The DC, Chicago and SF gun bans were draconian gun-grabbing attempts. Few other laws have been. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2022, 5:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/san-jose-ca-gun-tax-law-is-a-positive-first-step-to-rational-gun-ownership/945433/385 "2022-02-18T05:08:55Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Sure a dude could buy one gun and resell it. Still, he’d need a background check on all sales. So if my father sells me a gun, he needs to do a background check even though he knows my criminal history? I’m trying to understand what is reasonable, because it seems unreasonable for him to do something he already knows the answer to. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2022, 5:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/san-jose-ca-gun-tax-law-is-a-positive-first-step-to-rational-gun-ownership/945433/386 "2022-02-18T05:12:36Z")
The background check would come back “No sale” and he couldn’t sell it to you. Of course if he knows you have a felony conviction, then he shouldn’t sell the gun to you at all. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2022, 5:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/san-jose-ca-gun-tax-law-is-a-positive-first-step-to-rational-gun-ownership/945433/387 "2022-02-18T05:14:32Z")
Is this really a problem that creates school shootings? Fathers and sons selling or giving guns to one another such that we should create a new hurdle to such a thing? Sounds like the embarrassing attitude of the left. Why would you side with that? ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2022, 5:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/san-jose-ca-gun-tax-law-is-a-positive-first-step-to-rational-gun-ownership/945433/388 "2022-02-18T05:15:46Z")
Is it so you can appear reasonable and not an absolutist? Do you think they will be done once all private sales need a background check? ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2022, 5:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/san-jose-ca-gun-tax-law-is-a-positive-first-step-to-rational-gun-ownership/945433/389 "2022-02-18T05:20:47Z")
How many cases of exactly that do you want? ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2022, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/san-jose-ca-gun-tax-law-is-a-positive-first-step-to-rational-gun-ownership/945433/390 "2022-02-18T05:22:32Z")
Well, one would be a good start. A father sells or gives his son a gun was my example. And implicit was that he did not know of a son’s criminal past or that the transfer was illegal. ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2022, 5:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/san-jose-ca-gun-tax-law-is-a-positive-first-step-to-rational-gun-ownership/945433/391 "2022-02-18T05:24:20Z")
Funny it was “creates school shootings” now it’s an illegal transfer. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2022, 5:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/san-jose-ca-gun-tax-law-is-a-positive-first-step-to-rational-gun-ownership/945433/392 "2022-02-18T05:26:05Z")
I’m simply not following. Why can’t someone arrest a father for giving his son, that he knows is a felon, any gun? ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2022, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/san-jose-ca-gun-tax-law-is-a-positive-first-step-to-rational-gun-ownership/945433/393 "2022-02-18T15:00:52Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > Everyone’s lies get them convicted. That is to laugh. A gun is used in a robbery/homiced, the police trace the gun back, go to the FFL that sold it, get out the log book, look up the gun, then go find the person who bought the gun from the FFL. The person says, “Oh, I must have lost it or it must have been stolen.” How much followup is there going to be? How much do think there should be? Should they take the person down to the station and interrogate them for a few hours, using some of the tricks to get people to confess as discussed in “can police lie” thread, or just take them at their word and let them go about their day? If the former, well, expect screaming from the rooftops. If the latter, which is pretty much current practice, then their lies will _not_ get them convicted. > [@UltraVires](#): > > But would you tell me what your solution is? As I’ve said numerous times on these boards, I favor registration. You buy a gun, you register it with a national database, rather than having to go to the physical location you bought it and have to look it up in the FFL’s book. You sell a gun, you register that sale. You have them provide ID, and you register who you sold it to. If you lose or have your gun stolen, you report it as soon as you are aware of the loss. Thefts should be investigated, and if the theft occurred due to the gun owner’s negligence, then they should be required to attain the knowledge and equipment to properly secure their guns before they are allowed to buy another one. I am also in favor of ensuring that guns are secured. They should either be on your person, or they should be securely locked away. Couch cushions are not a secure way to steal a gun. If someone breaks into your industry standard approved gun safe, then you are not at fault. If someone steals it from your couch or nightstand, you are. And you _should_ carry insurance on your gun. If your homeowner’s policy covers it, great. If you are renting and don’t have a renter’s insurance policy that will cover it, then you should get a supplemental policy that does. However, your homeowner’s policy doesn’t cover your gun if you take it off your property, so if you are planning on doing that, then you should get a supplemental policy that covers that. If you are at the grocery store, and your kid pulls out your gun and shoots me, who is supposed to pay for my medical bills? If [this kid hadn’t died](https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/02/17/9-year-old-arlene-alvarez-shot-killed-houston/) from the gunshot wounds she suffered, who would pay for hers? (Out of curiosity, would you recommend charges against her killer? Or was he just being a good guy with a gun, and she was just in the wrong place at the wrong time?) You and @DrDeth seem to disagree on whether an insurance policy could cover damages done by a stolen gun. I don’t see why it shouldn’t, there will still be max payouts and such, it’s not like it’s an open ended liability on their part. But, one of the reasons that _I_ like the insurance model is that way, you are having the power of the free market tell you how to secure your gun, not government fiat. If you get a discount on your insurance by having the tools and knowledge to properly secure your gun and use it responsibly, then people will be encouraged to properly secure their gun and use it responsibly. But, I repeat myself, I’ve gone through this several times on these boards, and am yet repeatedly accused of wanting to ban guns. > [@UltraVires](#): > > Of course not. By definition they don’t obey laws. The thing about that, is that there are plenty of loopholes that remove any liability from the person providing the gun to the criminal. Removing those loopholes will reduce the number of guns in the hands of criminals. > [@DrDeth](#): > > Why would you want to repeal the 2nd Ad otherwise? Miller made it very clear that he wants to ban handguns. At least. Miller, like many Americans, keeps hearing over and over from pro-gun advocates that there is nothing that can be done to mitigate the damage done by guns without repealing the Second Amendment. They are told that the only way to decrease gun violence is to ban guns. It is the gun advocates who make this argument, over and over, and eventually, after every other suggestion is shot down, you manage to convince people that you are right. > [@DrDeth](#): > > The kicker is that not only is that one special rider insurance not available, _it is actually illegal under State Law._ Which means that you **can’t** buy the insurance, which means this is a gun ban. See, you start with the idea that they are being disingenuous and nefarious, and then find ways to confirm your beliefs. Are you absolutely positive that such an insurance policy cannot exist? If it is shown that such a policy can and does exist, do you drop your objections, or just dig up some more? > [@DrDeth](#): > > And it is the gun banning crowd, that is the cause of the uSA not having sane, reasonable gun laws: How so? Is this an attempt at a “Look what you made me do” fallacy? > [@DrDeth](#): > > But three cities passed stupid and useless handgun/ gun bans- and the DC one went to SCOTUS. I do think that cities should be allowed to make laws that work for their population. Urban areas and rural areas are different and have different needs, to make them fall under the same laws is ridiculous. > [@DrDeth](#): > > So Chicago had to know that a city-wide handgun ban was useless- yet they passed it anyway. It’s not useless, it’s just not as useful as it _could_ be if there were laws that would make it harder for people to buy guns in Indiana and bring them over the border. Being able to stop someone on the street for having a gun would reduce the number of guns freely flowing about the streets. But _not_ being able to use the presence of a gun as a reason to stop someone means that criminals can walk the streets of Chicago armed to the teeth and there’s nothing that anyone can do until they pull the trigger. > [@DrDeth](#): > > But normal, everyday honest law abiding gun owners don;t want it, as they (justifiably) fear it will be used for Gun confiscation. See, this is you, admitting that it’s not those wanting to mitigate the damage that guns do to society that are at fault, it is the paranoia of the gun advocates. > [@DrDeth](#): > > If people would stop trying to ban guns- which scares the normal, everyday honest law abiding gun owner- we could have some sane, useful gun laws to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. No, we can’t, because anyone who proposes a sane, useful gun law will be labeled a gun banner. > [@DrDeth](#): > > it is the _gun banners_ who are the reason for all the “gun violence” in America. The gun banners are not the ones who are selling or losing or letting be stolen their guns. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2022, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/san-jose-ca-gun-tax-law-is-a-positive-first-step-to-rational-gun-ownership/945433/394 "2022-02-18T17:02:05Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > The person says, “Oh, I must have lost it or it must have been stolen.” People say this, even pro gun people say that is what they will tell the government when guns are outlawed. But police aren’t that stupid. You just misplaced a gun and didn’t think about where you left it and looked for it? You didn’t report it missing or stolen? It cost $500? Would you just walk away from five Ben Franklins? No? Then why were you so indifferent about “losing” your gun? If I am a police officer, that dude becomes my suspect #1 in the crime. > [@k9bfriender](#): > > Thefts should be investigated, and if the theft occurred due to the gun owner’s negligence, then they should be required to attain the knowledge and equipment to properly secure their guns before they are allowed to buy another one. So it is not the person who steals the gun’s fault. It is mine for allowing it to be stolen? What type of victim blaming would be permitting in any other circumstance? Do you not see how facially absurd it is that you would blame me for my property being stolen? ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2022, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/san-jose-ca-gun-tax-law-is-a-positive-first-step-to-rational-gun-ownership/945433/395 "2022-02-18T17:06:11Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > You sell a gun, you register that sale. You have them provide ID, and you register who you sold it to. If you lose or have your gun stolen, you report it as soon as you are aware of the loss. How does this stop Lanza or any one of the school shooters? How does it stop the Vegas shooter? When your proposed law isn’t one that would solve the current problems, we do fear that you will want to pass just one more. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2022, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/san-jose-ca-gun-tax-law-is-a-positive-first-step-to-rational-gun-ownership/945433/396 "2022-02-18T17:14:20Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > It’s not useless, it’s just not as useful as it _could_ be if there were laws that would make it harder for people to buy guns in Indiana and bring them over the border. Being able to stop someone on the street for having a gun would reduce the number of guns freely flowing about the streets. But _not_ being able to use the presence of a gun as a reason to stop someone means that criminals can walk the streets of Chicago armed to the teeth and there’s nothing that anyone can do until they pull the trigger. > [@k9bfriender](#): > > See, this is you, admitting that it’s not those wanting to mitigate the damage that guns do to society that are at fault, it is the paranoia of the gun advocates. Sorry for the triple post, but this highlights our fears. You say that you just want to make it 'harder" to buy guns in Indiana and transport them to Chicago. It is already illegal to do that. You want to make it extra illegal. Yet you still say that you don’t want to ban guns, and if you don’t then what stops anyone in Indiana from doing what you propose? That’s the issue here. It all ends with no gun buying in Indiana or Chicago or elsewhere because anyone can put them in someone else’s hands to do harm, and therefore nobody should buy them: a gun ban. How are we wrong there? ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2022, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/san-jose-ca-gun-tax-law-is-a-positive-first-step-to-rational-gun-ownership/945433/397 "2022-02-18T18:31:28Z")
To me, your post indicated that the father knew that the son had committed a felony. However, I am open to a exclusion for transfers between family members as I mentioned. > [@k9bfriender](#): > > A gun is used in a robbery/homiced, the police trace the gun back, go to the FFL that sold it, get out the log book, look up the gun, then go find the person who bought the gun from the FFL. > > The person says, “Oh, I must have lost it or it must have been stolen.” > [@k9bfriender](#): > > As I’ve said numerous times on these boards, I favor registration. You buy a gun, you register it with a national database, rather than having to go to the physical location you bought it and have to look it up in the FFL’s book. You sell a gun, you register that sale. You have them provide ID, and you register who you sold it to. If you lose or have your gun stolen, you report it as soon as you are aware of the loss. "_The person says, “Oh, I must have lost it or it must have been stolen.”_ Law enforcement is not big on the idea of gun registration as it rarely does anything. However, if instead we outlawed straw dealers, when you traced the gun to Strawman Bob, found out he had bout 40 guns that year and had 4 in his possession, he could be arrested for being an unregistered dealer, not doing background checks and not filling in the proper FFL forms. That comes to 69 counts @ 5 years each. > [@k9bfriender](#): > > You and @DrDeth seem to disagree on whether an insurance policy could cover damages done by a stolen gun. I don’t see why it shouldn’t, there will still be max payouts and such, it’s not like it’s an open ended liability on their part. Because that goes against all common and tort law. It is also against the law in CA, at least. > [@k9bfriender](#): > > See, you start with the idea that they are being disingenuous and nefarious, and then find ways to confirm your beliefs. Are you absolutely positive that such an insurance policy cannot exist? I I have given cites earlier that said that not only does it not exists, it is illegal in CA. ---
**Author:** ![Chingon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chingon/32/17645_2.png) [@Chingon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chingon)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2022, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/san-jose-ca-gun-tax-law-is-a-positive-first-step-to-rational-gun-ownership/945433/398 "2022-02-18T19:27:57Z")
What specific parts of “Biden’s Plan” do you support and which do you not? Your already said you only support some of it. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2022, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/san-jose-ca-gun-tax-law-is-a-positive-first-step-to-rational-gun-ownership/945433/399 "2022-02-18T19:50:23Z")
No more just asking questions. You asked me what sort of gun control I support, I told you, I gave cite, and I asked you > [@DrDeth](#): > > Now, tell us exactly what legislation you want. So, you answer my questions now. Your turn. ---
**Author:** ![Chingon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chingon/32/17645_2.png) [@Chingon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chingon)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2022, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/san-jose-ca-gun-tax-law-is-a-positive-first-step-to-rational-gun-ownership/945433/400 "2022-02-18T20:04:36Z")
Well you didn’t really. You hand-waved toward something which you said only partially supported. It was like a tobacco exec saying they supported anti-teen smoking regulations, and when pressed couldn’t name any specific actions or laws they wanted passed. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/san-jose-ca-gun-tax-law-is-a-positive-first-step-to-rational-gun-ownership/945433.md?page=19) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/san-jose-ca-gun-tax-law-is-a-positive-first-step-to-rational-gun-ownership/945433.md?page=21)