Letters: S.J. gun law | Unfounded claims | New assessor | More to do | Anti-abortion arguments

Submit your letter to the editor via this form. Read more Letters to the Editor.

S.J. gun law is ripe
for defeat in court

The San Jose City Council requiring gun owners to pay a fee and buy insurance is political theater. The Council knows it. If they don’t, they are unfit for office. This ordinance advances gun rights and has given gun rights organizations legal low-hanging fruit for the courts. They decided to tax a constitutional right. The San Jose City Council may as well have instituted a poll tax.

Let’s remember, the Supreme Court has established – in upholding the Obamacare insurance mandate – that the mandate only survived as a tax. Thus, San Jose is taxing a constitutional right: “A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the federal Constitution,” Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 US 105.

San Jose, your constitutional ignorance for the sake of political grandstanding has given gun owners and their advocates a clear court victory. Enjoy your ill-conceived, short-lived glory as the unintended consequences unfold nationwide.

Patrick J. McNamara
Martinez

Letter’s Cupertino
claims are unfounded

Jon Ramos (“Vallco delays risk Cupertino’s finances,” Letters to the Editor, Page A12, Jan 21) irresponsibly claimed that the Cupertino City Council and Mayor Darcy Paul are purposely delaying a development project. In fact, the Vallco construction is not proceeding because of an environmental cleanup of extensive toxic contamination. This state-mandated mitigation is being overseen by a different agency, namely the county Department of Environmental Health, not Cupertino.

Ramos’ other unfounded claim that the city’s ongoing legal bills are higher than usual is simply political rhetoric. The voters of Cupertino know who does the work, and who lies for their own gain. His childish sideswipe is laughable. Our city finances are among the best in California.

It took 10 years to clear out the bad elements in Cupertino City Hall where problems festered since the name “Vallco” was coined. The recent staff turnover is an achievement, not a failure.

Ramos should mind his own home front in San Jose.

Ignatius Ding
Cupertino

After 30 years, time
for a new assessor

After reading about Assessor Larry Stone claiming he was “hacked” by a political opponent (“Assessor: Opponent swiped my contacts,” Page B1, Jan. 14), I just had to roll my eyes. I was a former senior appraiser In the Assessor’s Office, I felt that it was important to share some firsthand insight. It is abundantly clear that Stone does not understand what hacked means.

In the article, he accuses his opponent of having a “cavalier approach to the law and personal privacy,” when in fact Stone’s careless attitude toward security and personal information, coupled with his lack of understanding on how to use simple technology like emails, is what got him into the situation in the first place.

Plain and simple, do we trust the man who can’t use emails, and is still running his office with 1970s assessment technology to lead our county into the future? After almost three decades, it is time for a new assessor to step in.

Brian O’Neill
San Jose

PG&E has much more
to do for fire safety

In regards to Patti Poppe’s Letter to the Editor that appeared on Jan. 25 (“PG&E making strides to keep state safe,” Page A6, Jan. 25), PG&E has a lot more to do than just have a Wildfire Command Center.

PG&E needs to upgrade the existing infrastructure. A 50+-year-old grid with a lot of deferred maintenance since the 1970s cannot support the needs and safety of its customers.

PG&E has to move from a fix on failure to a proactive method of thinking with its maintenance and upgrading aging wooden power poles, the use of auto-closing relays and if we should even be using them, tree management and clean up of ground-level fuel loads.

Most importantly, utilities should not be publicly traded companies. As a publicly traded company, there is little incentive for PG&E to invest internally. There is a significant interest in posting a positive balance sheet to please its investors.

Conrad Schapira
Milpitas

Anti-abortion arguments
saddening and infuriating

Each year as I read about the annual abortion protests (“Walk for Life protests abortion,” Page A1, Jan. 23) I am deeply saddened knowing that if these pro-birth protesters have their way, and the current Donald Trump-stacked Supreme Court severely curtails or overturns Roe v Wade, countless young, frightened and often poor women will die attempting to terminate their unwanted pregnancies.

As for protester Irene Zamorano-Archki, coordinator of Silent no More, who admonishes President Biden to “start acting like” a baptized Catholic, I take solace in our presidents’ steadfast belief in both a woman’s right to choose and the separation of church and state. Yet another protester, Paul Coraso, urges the closing of clinics that perform abortions to “make women think twice“: it’s always so easy for a man to know what’s best for women. Finally, and most infuriating, are the words of Tracy, who says, “I’ve had several abortions,” yet she wishes to deny all women that very same choice.

Barry Goldman-Hall
San Jose